Document ID: EPA-R02-OAR-2012-0889-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: New Jersey; Redesignation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes and Approval of the Associated Maintenance Plan
Posted Date: 2013-06-27T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 124 (Thursday, June 27, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38648-38672]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15147]

[[Page 38648]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R02-OAR-2012-0889; FRL-9827-3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
State of New Jersey; Redesignation of Areas for Air Quality Planning 
Purposes and Approval of the Associated Maintenance Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a redesignation request and State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of New 
Jersey. The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) 
is requesting that EPA redesignate the New Jersey portion of the New 
York-N.New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT nonattainment area, and the New 
Jersey portion of the Philadelphia-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE nonattainment 
area, from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 
24-hour Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality 
Standards (NAAQS). In conjunction with its redesignation request, New 
Jersey submitted a SIP revision containing a maintenance plan for the 
areas that provides for continued maintenance of the 1997 annual and 
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The maintenance plan includes the 
2007 attainment year emissions inventory that EPA is proposing to 
approve in this rulemaking in accordance with the requirements of the 
Clean Air Act (CAA).
    EPA is also proposing to approve a supplement to the 2007 
attainment year emission inventory previously submitted by the State as 
part of the SIP revision. EPA is proposing that the inventories for 
ammonia (NH3) and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) that were 
submitted as part of the supplement, in conjunction with the 
inventories for nitrogen oxides (NOX), direct 
PM2.5, and sulfur dioxide (SO2) that were 
previously submitted, meet the comprehensive emissions inventory 
requirement of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA.
    Additionally, EPA is proposing to approve the 2009 and 2025 motor 
vehicle emissions budgets for PM2.5 and NOX.
    EPA previously determined that the New Jersey portions of the New 
York-N.New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT and Philadelphia-Wilmington, 
PA-nonattainment areas have attained the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS. In this action, EPA is proposing to approve the 
request for redesignation for the 1997 annual and 24-hour 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS, the maintenance plan, and the 2007 attainment 
year inventory based on EPA's determination that the areas have met the 
redesignation requirements set forth in the CAA.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 29, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R02-OAR-2012-0889 by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. Email: Ruvo.Richard@epa.gov.
    3. Fax: 212-637-3901.
    4. Mail: Richard Ruvo, Chief, Air Planning Section, Air Programs 
Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 
25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to: Richard 
Ruvo, Chief, Air Planning Section, Air Programs Branch, Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, 
New York 10007-1866. Such deliveries are only accepted during the 
Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's 
official business hours is Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 
p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R02-OAR-
2012-0889. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
www.regulations.gov, 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 through www.regulations.gov, or 
email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. 
The www.regulations.gov Web site is 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 email 
comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your 
email 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. For additional 
information about EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center 
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. 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 www.regulations.gov or 
in hard copy at the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 
Air Programs Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 
10007-1866. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the 
contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to view 
the hard copy of the docket. You may view the hard copy of the docket 
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding legal 
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Raymond Forde (forde.raymond@epa.gov) 
concerning emission inventories and Kenneth Fradkin 
(fradkin.kenneth@epa.gov) concerning other portions of the SIP 
revision, Air Programs Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New 
York 10007-1866, (212) 637-4249.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

Table of Contents

I. What are the actions EPA is proposing to take?
II. What is the background for EPA's proposed actions?
    A. General
    B. Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and Cross State Air 
Pollution Rule (CSAPR or the Transport Rule)
III. What are the criteria for redesignation?
IV. What is the effect of EPA's proposed actions?
V. What is the effect of the January 4, 2013 D.C. Circuit Decision 
Regarding PM2.5 Implementation Under Subpart 4?
    A. Background

[[Page 38649]]

    B. Proposal on This issue
VI. What is EPA's analysis of New Jersey's redesignation request?
    A. Attainment
    B. The Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 
110 and Part D of the CAA
    C. Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) of the CAA
    D. The Air Quality Improvement Must Be Permanent and Enforceable
    E. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant 
to Section 175A of the CAA
VII. What is EPA's analysis of New Jersey's proposed NOX 
and PM2.5 motor vehicle emission budgets?
VIII. What is the status of EPA's adequacy determination for the 
proposed NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for 2009 and 2025 
for Northern and Southern New Jersey?
IX. What action is EPA proposing to take?
X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What are the actions EPA is proposing to take?

    On December 26, 2012, the State of New Jersey, through NJDEP, 
submitted a request to redesignate the New Jersey portion of the New 
York-N.New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT nonattainment area (``NY-NJ-CT 
nonattainment area''), and the New Jersey portion of the Philadelphia-
Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE nonattainment area (``PA-NJ-DE nonattainment 
area'') from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Concurrently, NJDEP submitted a 
maintenance plan for the areas as a SIP revision to ensure continued 
attainment. In a supplemental submission to EPA on May 3, 2013, the 
State of New Jersey submitted NH3 and VOC emissions 
inventories to supplement the emissions inventories that had been 
submitted on December 26, 2012.
    EPA is proposing to take several actions pursuant to the 
redesignation of the New Jersey portion of the NY-NJ-CT and the PA-NJ-
DE nonattainment areas for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is proposing to find that the New Jersey 
portion of the NY-NJ-CT nonattainment area (hereafter referred to as 
the Northern New Jersey PM2.5 ``or NNJ'' nonattainment area) 
and the New Jersey portion of the PA-NJ-DE nonattainment area 
(hereafter referred to as the Southern New Jersey PM2.5 ``or 
SNJ'' nonattainment area) meet the requirements for redesignation under 
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is thus proposing to approve New Jersey's 
request to change the legal definition of the NNJ and SNJ nonattainment 
areas from nonattainment to attainment. This action does not impact the 
New York and Connecticut portions of the NY-NJ-CT nonattainment area, 
or the Pennsylvania and Delaware portions of the PA-NJ-DE nonattainment 
area. EPA may take separate actions on those portions of the 
nonattainment areas in a separate rulemaking.
    EPA is also proposing to approve the maintenance plan for the NNJ 
and SNJ nonattainment areas as a revision to the New Jersey SIP. Such 
approval is one of the CAA criteria for redesignation of an area to 
attainment. The maintenance plan is designed to ensure continued 
attainment in the NNJ and SNJ nonattainment areas for the 1997 annual 
and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for 10 years after 
redesignation. The maintenance plan includes the 2007 attainment year, 
2017 interim year, and 2025 end year projection emission inventories. 
EPA is also proposing to approve the 2009 and 2025 motor vehicle 
emissions budgets for PM2.5 and Nitrogen Oxides 
(NOX).
    In this proposed redesignation, EPA takes into account the D.C. 
Circuit January 4, 2013 decision remanding to EPA the ``Final Clean Air 
Fine Particle Implementation Rule'' (72 FR 20586, April 25, 2007) and 
the ``Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program for 
Particulate Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)'' final 
rule (73 FR 28321, May 16, 2008), Natural Resources Defense Council v. 
EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
    EPA's analysis for these proposed actions is discussed in sections 
V, VI and VII of today's proposed rulemaking action.

II. What is the background for EPA's proposed actions?

A. General

    The first air quality standards for PM2.5 were 
promulgated on July 18, 1997, at 62 FR 38652. EPA promulgated an annual 
standard at a level of 15 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\), 
based on a three-year average of annual mean PM2.5 
concentrations. In the same rulemaking, EPA promulgated a 24-hour 
standard of 65 [mu]g/m\3\, based on a three-year average of the 98th 
percentile of 24-hour concentrations. On October 17, 2006, at 71 FR 
61144, EPA retained the annual average standard at 15 [mu]g/m\3\ but 
revised the 24-hour standard to 35 [mu]g/m\3\, based again on the 
three-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations.
    On January 5, 2005, at 70 FR 944, and supplemented on April 14, 
2005, at 70 FR 19844, EPA designated the NY-NJ-CT and PA-NJ-DE 
nonattainment areas as nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 air 
quality standards. In that action, EPA defined the NNJ nonattainment 
area to include Bergen, Essex, Hudson, Mercer, Middlesex, Monmouth, 
Morris, Passaic, Somerset, and Union Counties; and defined the SNJ 
nonattainment area to include Burlington, Camden, and Gloucester 
Counties. On November 13, 2009, at 74 FR 58688, EPA promulgated 
designations for the 24-hour standard set in 2006, designating the NY-
NJ-CT nonattainment area and the PA-NJ-DE nonattainment area as 
nonattainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The 
nonattainment area boundaries for the NNJ and SNJ nonattainment areas 
for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS were identical to the boundaries 
for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, containing the same counties as 
listed above. EPA did not promulgate designations for the annual 
average NAAQS promulgated in 2006 since that NAAQS was essentially 
identical to the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Today's action 
addresses the designation for the annual NAAQS promulgated in 1997, and 
the 24-hour NAAQS promulgated in 2006, for the NNJ and the SNJ 
nonattainment areas.
    In the final rulemaking action dated November 15, 2010 (75 FR 
69589), EPA determined, pursuant to CAA section 179(c), that the entire 
NY-NJ-CT nonattainment area had attained the 1997 annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS, based upon quality assured, quality controlled, 
and certified ambient air monitoring data for the period of 2007-2009. 
On May 16, 2012 (77 FR 28782), EPA determined that the entire PA-NJ-DE 
nonattainment area was attaining the 1997 annual PM2.5 
NAAQS, based upon quality assured, quality controlled, and certified 
ambient air monitoring data for the 2007-2009 and 2008-2010 monitoring 
periods.
    EPA finalized, on December 31, 2012 (77 FR 76867), the 
determination that the entire NY-NJ-CT nonattainment area had attained 
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, based upon quality assured, 
quality controlled, and certified ambient air monitoring data that 
showed that the area had monitored attainment of the 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS for the 2007-2009 and 2008-2010 monitoring 
periods. On January 7, 2013 (78 FR 882), EPA finalized the 
determination that the PA-NJ-DE nonattainment area had attained the 
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, based upon quality assured, 
quality controlled, and certified ambient air monitoring data that 
showed that the areas had monitored attainment of the 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS for the 2008-2010 and 2009-2011 monitoring 
periods.
    The 3-year ambient air quality data for the last three year 
monitoring periods for the 2007-2009, 2008-2010, and 2009-2011 
indicated no violations for

[[Page 38650]]

the 1997 annual PM2.5 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 
Preliminary design values for 2010-2012 also indicate no violations for 
the 1997 annual PM2.5 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. As a 
result of the monitoring data continuing to show attainment, on 
December 26, 2012 New Jersey requested redesignation of the NNJ and the 
SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas to attainment for the 1997 
annual PM2.5 and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Under 
the CAA, nonattainment areas may be redesignated to attainment if 
sufficient, complete, quality-assured data is available for the 
Administrator to determine that the area has attained the standard and 
the area meets the other CAA redesignation requirements under 
107(d)(3)(E).

B. Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and Cross State Air Pollution Rule 
(CSAPR or the Transport Rule)

    On May 12, 2005, EPA published CAIR, which requires significant 
reductions in emissions of SO2 and NOX from 
electric generating units (EGUs) to limit the interstate transport of 
these pollutants and the ozone and PM2.5 they form in the 
atmosphere. See 70 FR 25162. The D.C. Circuit initially vacated CAIR, 
North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008), but ultimately 
remanded the rule to EPA without vacatur to preserve the environmental 
benefits provided by CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 
(D.C. Cir. 2008). In response to the D.C. Circuit's decision, EPA 
issued the Transport Rule, also known as CSAPR, to address interstate 
transport of NOX and SO2 in the eastern United 
States. See 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011).
    On August 21, 2012, the D.C. Circuit issued a decision to vacate 
CSAPR. In that decision, it also ordered EPA to continue administering 
CAIR ``pending the promulgation of a valid replacement.'' EME Homer 
City, 696 F.3d at 38. The D.C. Circuit denied all petitions for 
rehearing on January 24, 2013. EPA and other parties have filed 
petitions for certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court, but those petitions 
have not been acted on to date. Nonetheless, EPA intends to continue to 
act in accordance with the EME Homer City opinion.
    As explained below, EPA proposes that New Jersey has demonstrated 
that the attainment of the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS will be maintained with or without the 
implementation of CAIR or CSAPR. New Jersey's maintenance plan does not 
include the emission reductions from either program in the permanent 
and enforceable Federal and State control measures needed for 
attainment and continued maintenance. In addition, air quality modeling 
analysis conducted during the CSAPR rulemaking process also 
demonstrated that the counties in the NY-NJ-CT and PA-NJ-DE 
nonattainment areas will have PM2.5 levels below the 1997 
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in both 2012 and 2014 
without taking into account emissions reductions from CAIR or CSAPR. 
See ``Air Quality Modeling Final Rule Technical Support Document'' \1\, 
App. B, B-18, B-19. This modeling is also available in the docket for 
this proposed redesignation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The document is available at http://www.epa.gov/crossstaterule/pdfs/AQModeling.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. What are the criteria for redesignation?

    Under the CAA, designations can be revised if sufficient data is 
available to warrant such revisions. Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA 
identifies five specific requirements that an area must meet in order 
to be redesignated from nonattainment to attainment.
    1. The area must have attained the applicable NAAQS.
    2. The area must meet all applicable requirements under section 110 
and part D of the CAA.
    3. The area must have a fully approved SIP under section 110 (k) of 
the CAA.
    4. The air quality improvement must be permanent and enforceable.
    5. The area must have a fully approved maintenance plan pursuant to 
section 175A of the CAA.
    EPA has provided guidance on redesignation in the General Preamble 
for the Implementation of title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990 (April 
16, 1992, 57 FR 13498, and supplemented on April 28, 1992, 57 FR 18070) 
and has provided further guidance on processing redesignation requests 
in the following documents:
    1. ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to 
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 
Management Division, September 4, 1992 (hereafter referred to as the 
``Calcagni Memorandum'');
    2. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response 
to Clean Air Act (CAA) Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, 
Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;
    3. ``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
    4. ``Implementation Guidance for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 
NAAQS,'' Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Director, Office of Air 
Quality Planning and Standards, March 2, 2012.

IV. What is the effect of EPA's proposed actions?

    EPA's approval of the redesignation request, if made final, would 
change the official designation of the NNJ and the SNJ PM2.5 
nonattainment areas to attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 
and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, found at 40 CFR part 81. It 
would incorporate into the New Jersey SIP a maintenance plan ensuring 
continued attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 and 2006 24-
hour PM2.5 NAAQS until 2025. The maintenance plan includes, 
among other elements, contingency measures to remedy any future 
violations, should they occur, of the 1997 annual PM2.5 and 
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Approval of the 2007 base year 
emissions inventory, which is part of the maintenance plan, will 
satisfy the inventory requirements under section 172(c)(3) of the CAA.

V. What is the effect of the January 4, 2013 D.C. Circuit decision 
regarding PM2.5 implementation under subpart 4?

A. Background

    As discussed in section I, on January 4, 2013, in Natural Resources 
Defense Council v. EPA, the D.C. Circuit remanded to EPA the ``Final 
Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule'' (72 FR 20586, April 25, 
2007) and the ``Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program 
for Particulate Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)'' 
final rule (73 FR 28321, May 16, 2008) (collectively, ``1997 
PM2.5 Implementation Rule''). 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013). 
The Court found that EPA erred in implementing the 1997 
PM2.5 NAAQS pursuant to the general implementation 
provisions of subpart 1 of part D of Title I of the CAA, rather than 
the particulate-matter-specific provisions of subpart 4 of part D of 
Title I. Although the Court's ruling did not directly address the 2006 
PM2.5 standard, EPA is taking into account the Court's 
position on subpart 4 and the 1997 PM2.5 standard in 
evaluating redesignations for the 2006 standard.

B. Proposal on This Issue

    EPA is proposing to determine that the Court's January 4, 2013 
decision does not prevent EPA from redesignating the NNJ and SNJ 
nonattainment areas to attainment for the 1997 and 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS. Even in light of the Court's decision,

[[Page 38651]]

redesignation for this area is appropriate under the CAA and EPA's 
longstanding interpretations of the CAA's provisions regarding 
redesignation. EPA first explains its longstanding interpretation that 
requirements that are imposed, or that become due, after a complete 
redesignation request is submitted for an area that is attaining the 
standard, are not applicable for purposes of evaluating a redesignation 
request.
    Second, EPA then shows that, even if EPA applies the subpart 4 
requirements to the New Jersey redesignation request and disregards the 
provisions of its 1997 PM2.5 implementation rule recently 
remanded by the Court, the State's request for redesignation of this 
area still qualifies for approval. EPA's discussion takes into account 
the effect of the Court's ruling on the area's maintenance plan, which 
EPA views as approvable when subpart 4 requirements are considered.
1. Applicable Requirements for Purposes of Evaluating the Redesignation 
Request
    With respect to the 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule, the 
Court's January 4, 2013 ruling rejected EPA's reasons for implementing 
the PM2.5 NAAQS solely in accordance with the provisions of 
subpart 1, and remanded that matter to EPA, so that it could address 
implementation of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS under subpart 4 of 
part D of the CAA, in addition to subpart 1. For the purposes of 
evaluating New Jersey's redesignation request for the areas, to the 
extent that implementation under subpart 4 would impose additional 
requirements for areas designated nonattainment, EPA believes that 
those requirements are not ``applicable'' for the purposes of CAA 
section 107(d)(3)(E), and thus EPA is not required to consider subpart 
4 requirements with respect to the New Jersey redesignation. Under its 
longstanding interpretation of the CAA, EPA has interpreted section 
107(d)(3)(E) to mean, as a threshold matter, that the part D provisions 
which are ``applicable'' and which must be approved in order for EPA to 
redesignate an area include only those which came due prior to a 
state's submittal of a complete redesignation request. See Calcagni 
memorandum referenced in section III. See also 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 Shapiro, 
Acting Assistant Administrator, Air and Radiation, September 17, 1993 
(Shapiro memorandum); Final Redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor, (60 FR 
12459, 12465-66, March 7, 1995); Final Redesignation of St. Louis, 
Missouri, (68 FR 25418, 25424-25427, May 12, 2003); Sierra Club v. EPA, 
375 F.3d 537, 541 (7th Cir. 2004) (upholding EPA's redesignation 
rulemaking applying this interpretation and expressly rejecting Sierra 
Club's view that the meaning of ``applicable'' under the statute is 
``whatever should have been in the plan at the time of attainment 
rather than whatever actually was in the plan and already implemented 
or due at the time of attainment'').\2\ In this case, at the time that 
New Jersey submitted its redesignation request, requirements under 
subpart 4 were not due, and indeed, were not yet known to apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's view that, for purposes of evaluating the NNJ and SNJ 
redesignation, the subpart 4 requirements were not due at the time the 
State submitted the redesignation request is in keeping with the EPA's 
interpretation of subpart 2 requirements for subpart 1 ozone areas 
redesignated subsequent to the D.C. Circuit's decision in South Coast 
Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006). In South 
Coast, the Court found that EPA was not permitted to implement the 1997 
8-hour ozone standard solely under subpart 1, and held that EPA was 
required under the statute to implement the standard under the ozone-
specific requirements of subpart 2 as well. Subsequent to the South 
Coast decision, in evaluating and acting upon redesignation requests 
for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard that were submitted to EPA for areas 
under subpart 1, EPA applied its longstanding interpretation of the CAA 
that ``applicable requirements'', for purposes of evaluating a 
redesignation, are those that had been due at the time the 
redesignation request was submitted. See, e.g., Proposed Redesignation 
of Manitowoc County and Door County Nonattainment Areas (75 FR 22047, 
22050, April 27, 2010). In those actions, EPA therefore did not 
consider subpart 2 requirements to be ``applicable'' for the purposes 
of evaluating whether the area should be redesignated under section 
107(d)(3)(E).
    EPA's interpretation derives from the provisions of CAA section 
107(d)(3). Section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) states that, for an area to be 
redesignated, a state must meet ``all requirements `applicable' to the 
area under section 110 and part D''. Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) provides 
that the EPA must have fully approved the ``applicable'' SIP for the 
area seeking redesignation. These two sections read together support 
EPA's interpretation of ``applicable'' as only those requirements that 
came due prior to submission of a complete redesignation request. 
First, holding states to an ongoing obligation to adopt new CAA 
requirements that arose after the state submitted its redesignation 
request, in order to be redesignated, would make it problematic or 
impossible for EPA to act on redesignation requests in accordance with 
the 18-month deadline Congress set for EPA action in section 
107(d)(3)(D). If ``applicable requirements'' were interpreted to be a 
continuing flow of requirements with no reasonable limitation, states, 
after submitting a redesignation request, would be forced continuously 
to make additional SIP submissions that in turn would require EPA to 
undertake further notice-and-comment rulemaking actions to act on those 
submissions. This would create a regime of unceasing rulemaking that 
would delay action on the redesignation request beyond the 18-month 
timeframe provided by the Act for this purpose.
    Second, a fundamental premise for redesignating a nonattainment 
area to attainment is that the area has attained the relevant NAAQS due 
to emission reductions from existing controls. Thus, an area for which 
a redesignation request has been submitted would have already attained 
the NAAQS as a result of satisfying statutory requirements that came 
due prior to the submission of the request. Absent a showing that 
unadopted and unimplemented requirements are necessary for future 
maintenance, it is reasonable to view the requirements applicable for 
purposes of evaluating the redesignation request as including only 
those SIP requirements that have already come due. These are the 
requirements that led to attainment of the NAAQS. To require, for 
redesignation approval, that a state also satisfy additional SIP 
requirements coming due after the state submits its complete 
redesignation request, and while EPA is reviewing it, would compel the 
state to do more than is necessary to attain the NAAQS, without a 
showing that the additional requirements are necessary for maintenance.
    In the context of this redesignation, the timing and nature of the 
Court's January 4, 2013 decision in NRDC v. EPA compound the 
consequences of imposing requirements that come due

[[Page 38652]]

after the redesignation request is submitted. The State submitted its 
redesignation request on December 26, 2012, but the Court did not issue 
its decision remanding EPA's 1997 PM2.5 implementation rule 
concerning the applicability of the provisions of subpart 4 until 
January 2013.
    To require the State's fully-completed and pending redesignation 
request to comply now with requirements of subpart 4 that the Court 
announced only in January, 2013, would be to give retroactive effect to 
such requirements when the State had no notice that it was required to 
meet them. The D.C. Circuit recognized the inequity of this type of 
retroactive impact in Sierra Club v. Whitman, 285 F.3d 63 (D.C. Cir. 
2002),\3\ where it upheld the District Court's ruling refusing to make 
retroactive EPA's determination that the St. Louis area did not meet 
its attainment deadline. In that case, petitioners urged the Court to 
make EPA's nonattainment determination effective as of the date that 
the statute required, rather than the later date on which EPA actually 
made the determination. The Court rejected this view, stating that 
applying it ``would likely impose large costs on States, which would 
face fines and suits for not implementing air pollution prevention 
plans . . . even though they were not on notice at the time.'' Id. at 
68. Similarly, it would be unreasonable to penalize the State of New 
Jersey by rejecting its redesignation request for an area that is 
already attaining the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 standards and that 
met all applicable requirements known to be in effect at the time of 
the request. For EPA now to reject the redesignation request solely 
because the state did not expressly address subpart 4 requirements of 
which it had no notice, would inflict the same unfairness condemned by 
the Court in Sierra Club v. Whitman.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Sierra Club v. Whitman was discussed and distinguished in a 
recent D.C. Circuit decision that addressed retroactivity in a quite 
different context, where, unlike the situation here, EPA sought to 
give its regulations retroactive effect. National Petrochemical and 
Refiners Ass'n v. EPA. 630 F.3d 145, 163 (D.C. Cir. 2010), rehearing 
denied 643 F.3d 958 (D.C. Cir. 2011), cert denied 132 S. Ct. 571 
(2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Subpart 4 Requirements and New Jersey Redesignation Request
    Even if EPA were to take the view that the Court's January 4, 2013 
decision requires that, in the context of pending redesignations, 
subpart 4 requirements were due and in effect at the time the State 
submitted its redesignation request, EPA proposes to determine that the 
NNJ and SNJ areas still qualify for redesignation to attainment. As 
explained below, EPA believes that the redesignation request for the 
NNJ and SNJ areas, though not expressed in terms of subpart 4 
requirements, substantively meets the requirements of that subpart for 
purposes of redesignating the area to attainment.
    With respect to evaluating the relevant substantive requirements of 
subpart 4 for purposes of redesignating the NNJ and SNJ areas, EPA 
notes that subpart 4 incorporates components of subpart 1 of part D, 
which contains general air quality planning requirements for areas 
designated as nonattainment. See section 172(c). Subpart 4 itself 
contains specific planning and scheduling requirements for 
PM10 \4\ nonattainment areas, and under the Court's January 
4, 2013 decision in NRDC v. EPA, these same statutory requirements also 
apply for PM2.5 nonattainment areas. EPA has longstanding 
general guidance that interprets the 1990 amendments to the CAA, making 
recommendations to states for meeting the statutory requirements for 
SIPs for nonattainment areas. See, ``State Implementation Plans; 
General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clear Air Act 
Amendments of 1990,'' 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) (the ``General 
Preamble''). In the General Preamble, EPA discussed the relationship of 
subpart 1 and subpart 4 SIP requirements, and pointed out that subpart 
1 requirements were to an extent ``subsumed by, or integrally related 
to, the more specific PM-10 requirements.'' 57 FR 13538 (April 16, 
1992). The subpart 1 requirements include, among other things, 
provisions for attainment demonstrations, reasonably available control 
measures (RACM), reasonable further progress (RFP), emissions 
inventories, and contingency measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ PM10 refers to particulates nominally 10 
micrometers in diameter or smaller.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the purposes of this redesignation, in order to identify any 
additional requirements which would apply under subpart 4, we are 
considering the NNJ and SNJ areas to be ``moderate'' PM2.5 
nonattainment areas. Under section 188 of the CAA, all areas designated 
nonattainment areas under subpart 4 would initially be classified by 
operation of law as ``moderate'' nonattainment areas, and would remain 
moderate nonattainment areas unless and until EPA reclassifies the area 
as a ``serious'' nonattainment area. Accordingly, EPA believes that it 
is appropriate to limit the evaluation of the potential impact of 
subpart 4 requirements to those that would be applicable to moderate 
nonattainment areas. Sections 189(a) and (c) of subpart 4 apply to 
moderate nonattainment areas and include the following: (1) An approved 
permit program for construction of new and modified major stationary 
sources (section 189(a)(1)(A)); (2) an attainment demonstration 
(section 189(a)(1)(B)); (3) provisions for RACM (section 189(a)(1)(C)); 
and (4) quantitative milestones demonstrating RFP toward attainment by 
the applicable attainment date (section 189(c)).
    The permit requirements of subpart 4, as contained in section 
189(a)(1)(A), refer to and apply the subpart 1 permit provisions 
requirements of sections 172 and 173 to PM10, without adding 
to them. Consequently, EPA believes that section 189(a)(1)(A) does not 
itself impose for redesignation purposes any additional requirements 
for moderate areas beyond those contained in subpart 1. In any event, 
in the context of redesignation, EPA has long relied on the 
interpretation that a fully approved nonattainment new source review 
program is not considered an applicable requirement for redesignation, 
provided the area can maintain the standard with a prevention of 
significant deterioration (PSD) program after redesignation. A detailed 
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 New Source Review Requirements for Areas Requesting 
Redesignation to Attainment.'' See also rulemakings for Detroit, 
Michigan (60 FR 12467-12468, March 7, 1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, 
Ohio (61 FR 20458, 20469-20470, May 7, 1996); Louisville, Kentucky (66 
FR 53665, October 23, 2001); and Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31834-
31837, June 21, 1996).
    With respect to the specific attainment planning requirements under 
subpart 4,\5\ when EPA evaluates a redesignation request under either 
subpart 1 and/or 4, any area that is attaining the PM2.5 
standard is viewed as having satisfied the attainment planning 
requirements for these subparts. For redesignations, EPA has for many 
years interpreted attainment-linked requirements as not applicable for 
areas attaining the standard. In the General Preamble, EPA stated that:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ i.e., attainment demonstration, RFP, RACM, milestone 
requirements, contingency measures.

    The requirements for RFP will not apply in evaluating a request 
for redesignation to attainment since, at a minimum, the air quality 
data for the area must show that the area has already attained. 
Showing that the

[[Page 38653]]

State will make RFP towards attainment will, therefore, have no 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
meaning at that point.

``General Preamble for the Interpretation of Title I of the Clean Air 
Act Amendments of 1990''; (57 FR 13498, 13564, April 16, 1992).
    The General Preamble also explained that

    [t]he section 172(c)(9) requirements are directed at ensuring 
RFP and attainment by the applicable date. These requirements no 
longer apply when an area has attained the standard and is eligible 
for redesignation. Furthermore, section 175A for maintenance plans . 
. . provides specific requirements for contingency measures that 
effectively supersede the requirements of section 172(c)(9) for 
these areas.

Id.

EPA similarly stated in its 1992 Calcagni memorandum that, ``The 
requirements for reasonable further progress and other measures needed 
for attainment will not apply for redesignations because they only have 
meaning for areas not attaining the standard.''
    It is evident that even if we were to consider the Court's January 
4, 2013 decision in NRDC v. EPA to mean that attainment-related 
requirements specific to subpart 4 should be imposed retroactively and 
thus are now past due, those requirements do not apply to an area that 
is attaining the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 standards, for the 
purpose of evaluating a pending request to redesignate the area to 
attainment. EPA has consistently enunciated this interpretation of 
applicable requirements under section 107(d)(3)(E) since the General 
Preamble was published more than twenty years ago. Courts have 
recognized the scope of EPA's authority to interpret ``applicable 
requirements'' in the redesignation context. See Sierra Club v. EPA, 
375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004).
    Moreover, even outside the context of redesignations, EPA has 
viewed the obligations to submit attainment-related SIP planning 
requirements of subpart 4 as inapplicable for areas that EPA determines 
are attaining the standard. EPA's prior ``Clean Data Policy'' 
rulemakings for the PM10 NAAQS, also governed by the 
requirements of subpart 4, explain EPA's reasoning. They describe the 
effects of a determination of attainment on the attainment-related SIP 
planning requirements of subpart 4. See ``Determination of Attainment 
for Coso Junction Nonattainment Area,'' (75 FR 27944, May 19, 2010). 
See also Coso Junction proposed PM10 redesignation, (75 FR 
36023, 36027, June 24, 2010); Proposed and Final Determinations of 
Attainment for San Joaquin Nonattainment Area (71 FR 40952, 40954-
40955, July 19, 2006; and 71 FR 63641, 63643-63647 October 30, 2006). 
In short, EPA in this context has also long concluded that to require 
states to meet superfluous SIP planning requirements is not necessary 
and not required by the CAA, so long as those areas continue to attain 
the relevant NAAQS.
    Elsewhere in this action, EPA proposes to determine that the NNJ 
and SNJ areas continue to attain the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 
standards. Under its longstanding interpretation, EPA is proposing to 
determine here that the areas meet the attainment-related plan 
requirements of subparts 1 and 4.
    Thus, EPA is proposing to conclude that the requirements to submit 
an attainment demonstration under 189(a)(1)(B), a RACM determination 
under section 172(c)(1) and section 189(a)(1)(c), a RFP demonstration 
under 189(c)(1), and contingency measure requirements under section 
172(c)(9) are satisfied for purposes of evaluating the redesignation 
request.
3. Subpart 4 and Control of PM2.5 Precursors
    The DC Circuit in NRDC v. EPA remanded to EPA the two rules at 
issue in the case with instructions to EPA to re-promulgate them 
consistent with the requirements of subpart 4. EPA in this section 
addresses the Court's opinion with respect to PM2.5 
precursors. While past implementation of subpart 4 for PM10 
has allowed for control of PM10 precursors such as 
NOX from major stationary, mobile, and area sources in order 
to attain the standard as expeditiously as practicable, CAA section 
189(e) specifically provides that control requirements for major 
stationary sources of direct PM10 shall also apply to 
PM10 precursors from those sources, except where EPA 
determines that major stationary sources of such precursors ``do not 
contribute significantly to PM10 levels which exceed the 
standard in the area.''
    EPA's 1997 PM2.5 implementation rule, remanded by the DC 
Circuit, contained rebuttable presumptions concerning certain 
PM2.5 precursors applicable to attainment plans and control 
measures related to those plans. Specifically, in 40 CFR 51.1002, EPA 
provided, among other things, that a state was ``not required to 
address VOC [and NH3] as . . . PM2.5 attainment 
plan precursor[s] and to evaluate sources of VOC [and NH3] 
emissions in the State for control measures.'' EPA intended these to be 
rebuttable presumptions. EPA established these presumptions at the time 
because of uncertainties regarding the emission inventories for these 
pollutants and the effectiveness of specific control measures in 
various regions of the country in reducing PM2.5 
concentrations. EPA also left open the possibility for such regulation 
of VOC and NH3 in specific areas where that was necessary.
    The Court in its January 4, 2013 decision made reference to both 
section 189(e) and 40 CFR 51. 1002, and stated that, ``In light of our 
disposition, we need not address the petitioners' challenge to the 
presumptions in [40 CFR 51.1002] that volatile organic compounds and 
NH3 are not PM2.5 precursors, as subpart 4 
expressly governs precursor presumptions.'' NRDC v. EPA, at 27, n.10.
    Elsewhere in the Court's opinion, however, the Court observed:

    NH3 is a precursor to fine particulate matter, making 
it a precursor to both PM2.5 and PM10. For a 
PM10 nonattainment area governed by subpart 4, a 
precursor is presumptively regulated. See 42 U.S.C. Sec.  7513a(e) 
[section 189(e)].

Id. at 21, n.7.
    For a number of reasons, EPA believes that its proposed 
redesignation of the NNJ and SNJ areas is consistent with the Court's 
decision on this aspect of subpart 4. First, while the Court, citing 
section 189(e), stated that ``for a PM10 area governed by 
subpart 4, a precursor is `presumptively regulated,' '' the Court 
expressly declined to decide the specific challenge to EPA's 1997 
PM2.5 implementation rule provisions regarding 
NH3 and VOC as precursors. The Court had no occasion to 
reach whether and how it was substantively necessary to regulate any 
specific precursor in a particular PM2.5 nonattainment area, 
and did not address what might be necessary for purposes of acting upon 
a redesignation request.
    However, even if EPA takes the view that the requirements of 
subpart 4 were deemed applicable at the time the state submitted the 
redesignation request, and disregards the implementation rule's 
rebuttable presumptions regarding NH3 and VOC as 
PM2.5 precursors (and any similar provisions reflected in 
guidance for the 2006 PM2.5 standard), the regulatory 
consequence would be to consider the need for regulation of all 
precursors from any sources in the area to demonstrate attainment and 
to apply the section 189(e) provisions to major stationary sources of 
precursors. In the case of the NNJ and SNJ areas EPA believes that 
doing so is consistent with proposing redesignation of the areas for 
the 1997 PM2.5 and 2006 PM2.5 standards. The NNJ 
and SNJ areas have attained the standard without any specific 
additional controls of VOC and

[[Page 38654]]

NH3 emissions from any sources in the area.
    Precursors in subpart 4 are specifically regulated under the 
provisions of section 189(e), which requires, with important 
exceptions, control requirements for major stationary sources of 
PM10 precursors.\6\ Under subpart 1 and EPA's prior 
implementation rule, all major stationary sources of PM2.5 
precursors were subject to regulation, with the exception of 
NH3 and VOC. Thus we must address here whether additional 
controls of NH3 and VOC from major stationary sources are 
required under section 189(e) of subpart 4 in order to redesignate the 
area for the 1997 PM2.5 and 2006 PM2.5 standards. 
As explained below, we do not believe that any additional controls of 
NH3 and VOC are required in the context of this 
redesignation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Under either subpart 1 or subpart 4, for purposes of 
demonstrating attainment as expeditiously as practicable, a state is 
required to evaluate all economically and technologically feasible 
control measures for direct PM emissions and precursor emissions, 
and adopt those measures that are deemed reasonably available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the General Preamble, EPA discusses its approach to implementing 
section 189(e). See 57 FR 13538-13542. With regard to precursor 
regulation under section 189(e), the General Preamble explicitly stated 
that control of VOCs under other Act requirements may suffice to 
relieve a state from the need to adopt precursor controls under section 
189(e). 57 FR 13542. EPA in this proposal proposes to determine that 
the SIP has met the provisions of section 189(e) with respect to 
NH3 and VOCs as precursors. This proposed determination is 
based on our findings that (1) the NNJ and SNJ areas contain no major 
stationary sources of NH3, and (2) existing major stationary 
sources of VOC are adequately controlled under other provisions of the 
CAA regulating the ozone NAAQS.\7\ In the alternative, EPA proposes to 
determine that, under the express exception provisions of section 
189(e), and in the context of the redesignation of the area, which is 
attaining the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 standards, at present 
NH3 and VOC precursors from major stationary sources do not 
contribute significantly to levels exceeding the 1997 and 2006 
PM2.5 standards in the NNJ and SNJ areas. See 57 FR 13539-
42.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The NNJ and SNJ areas have reduced VOC emissions through the 
implementation of various control programs including VOC Reasonably 
Available Control Technology regulations and various on-road and 
non-road motor vehicle control programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA notes that its 1997 PM2.5 implementation rule 
provisions in 40 CFR 51.1002 were not directed at evaluation of 
PM2.5 precursors in the context of redesignation, but at SIP 
plans and control measures required to bring a nonattainment area into 
attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. By contrast, 
redesignation to attainment primarily requires the area to have already 
attained due to permanent and enforceable emission reductions, and to 
demonstrate that controls in place can continue to maintain the 
standard. Thus, even if we regard the Court's January 4, 2013 decision 
as calling for ``presumptive regulation'' of NH3 and VOC for 
PM2.5 under the attainment planning provisions of subpart 4, 
those provisions in and of themselves do not require additional 
controls of these precursors for an area that already qualifies for 
redesignation. Nor does EPA believe that requiring New Jersey to 
address precursors differently than they have already would result in a 
substantively different outcome.
    Although, as EPA has emphasized, its consideration here of 
precursor requirements under subpart 4 is in the context of a 
redesignation to attainment, EPA's existing interpretation of subpart 4 
requirements with respect to precursors in attainment plans for 
PM10 contemplates that states may develop attainment plans 
that regulate only those precursors that are necessary for purposes of 
attainment in the area in question, i.e., states may determine that 
only certain precursors need be regulated for attainment and control 
purposes.\8\ Courts have upheld this approach to the requirements of 
subpart 4 for PM10.\9\ EPA believes that application of this 
approach to PM2.5 precursors under subpart 4 is reasonable. 
Because the NNJ and SNJ areas have already attained the 1997 and 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS with its current approach to regulation of 
PM2.5 precursors, EPA believes that it is reasonable to 
conclude in the context of this redesignation that there is no need to 
revisit the attainment control strategy with respect to the treatment 
of precursors. Even if the Court's decision is construed to impose an 
obligation, in evaluating this redesignation request, to consider 
additional precursors under subpart 4, it would not affect EPA's 
approval here of New Jersey's request for redesignation of the NNJ and 
SNJ areas. In the context of a redesignation, the areas have shown that 
they have attained the standards. Moreover, the State has shown and EPA 
is proposing to determine that attainment in these areas are due to 
permanent and enforceable emissions reductions on all precursors 
necessary to provide for continued attainment. It follows logically 
that no further control of additional precursors is necessary. 
Accordingly, EPA does not view the January 4, 2013 decision of the 
Court as precluding redesignation of the NNJ and SNJ areas to 
attainment for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See, e.g., ``Approval and Promulgation of Implementation 
Plans for California--San Joaquin Valley PM-10 Nonattainment Area; 
Serious Area Plan for Nonattainment of the 24-Hour and Annual PM-10 
Standards,'' 69 FR 30006 (May 26, 2004) (approving a PM10 
attainment plan that impose controls on direct PM10 and 
NOX emissions and did not impose controls on 
SO2, VOC, or ammonia emissions).
    \9\ See, e.g., Assoc. of Irritated Residents v. EPA et al., 423 
F.3d 989 (9th Cir. 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In sum, even if New Jersey were required to address precursors for 
the NNJ and SNJ areas under subpart 4 rather than under subpart 1, as 
interpreted in EPA's remanded PM2.5 implementation rule, EPA 
would still conclude that the area had met all applicable requirements 
for purposes of redesignation in accordance with section 
107(d)(3(E)(ii) and (v).

VI. What is EPA's analysis of New Jersey's redesignation request?

    In an effort to comply with the CAA and to ensure continued 
attainment of the NAAQS, on December 26, 2012, the State of New Jersey 
submitted a redesignation request and maintenance plan for the 1997 
annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for the NNJ and SNJ 
PM2.5 nonattainment areas.
    The following is a description of how the state has fulfilled each 
of the CAA redesignation requirements.

A. Attainment

    For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA 
requires EPA to determine that the area has attained the applicable 
NAAQS (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). In this action for this 
rulemaking, EPA is proposing to determine that the NY-NJ-CT and the PA-
NJ-DE nonattainment areas are continuing to attain the 1997 annual and 
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS
    An area may be considered to be attaining the 1997 annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS if it meets the NAAQS as determined in 
accordance with 40 CFR 50.7 and Appendix N of part 50, based on three 
complete, consecutive calendar years of quality-assured air quality 
monitoring data. To attain this standard, the three-year average of 
annual means must be less than or equal to 15 [mu]g/m\3\ at all 
relevant monitoring sites in the subject area. The relevant data must 
be collected and quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and

[[Page 38655]]

recorded in the EPA Air Quality System (AQS). The monitors meet data 
completeness requirements when ``at least 75 percent of the scheduled 
sampling days for each quarter have valid data.'' The use of less than 
complete data is subject to the approval of EPA, which may consider 
factors such as monitoring site closures/moves, monitoring diligence, 
and nearby concentrations in determining whether to use such data.
    As noted in section IIA above, EPA has finalized determinations 
that the NY-NJ-CT and PA-NJ-DE nonattainment areas had attained the 
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA has also reviewed more recent 
quality-assured data for both NY-NJ-CT and the PA-NJ-DE nonattainment 
areas. The ambient air monitoring data submitted by New Jersey shows 
PM2.5 concentrations attaining the annual PM2.5 
NAAQS for the 2009-2011 time period for both nonattainment areas.
    Table 1, below, shows the design value by county (i.e., 3-year 
average) of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations) for the 2009-
2011 time period for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the NY-
NJ-CT PM2.5 nonattainment area monitors. Table 2, below, 
shows the design value for the 2009-2011 time period for the 1997 
annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the PA-NJ-DE nonattainment area 
monitors. Preliminary design values\10\ for the 2010-2012 time period 
is also shown.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ All data for 2012 has been quality-assured.

                                Table 1--Design Value Concentrations for the NY-NJ-CT 1997 Annual PM2.5 Area ([mu]g/m\3\)
                                                            [The standard is 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Annual mean concentrations              Preliminary     2011 3-year     Preliminary
                                                         ------------------------------------------------   annual mean    annual design    2012 3-year
                                                                                                           concentration       value       annual design
               Nonattainment area counties                                                               --------------------------------      value
                                                               2009            2010            2011                                      ---------------
                                                                                                               2012          2009-2011       2010-2012
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW JERSEY:
    Bergen..............................................             9.1             8.8             9.8             8.9             9.2             9.2
    Essex...............................................             INC             9.2            10.5             9.0             INC             9.5
    Hudson..............................................            10.8            10.6            11.8            10.9            11.1            11.1
    Mercer..............................................             9.3             9.5            10.3             8.8             9.7             9.5
    Middlesex...........................................             8.1             7.4             8.3           * 8.3             7.9           * 8.0
    Monmouth............................................              NM              NM              NM              NM              NM              NM
    Morris..............................................             8.1             8.5             8.7             7.9             8.5             8.4
    Passaic.............................................             9.0             8.9            10.1             9.1             9.3           * 9.3
    Somerset............................................              NM              NM              NM              NM  ..............  ..............
    Union...............................................            11.3            10.6            12.2            10.7            11.4            11.2
NEW YORK:
    Bronx...............................................            12.7            11.4            11.6             9.5            11.9             9.8
    Kings...............................................            10.7             9.9            10.3             9.7            10.3             9.9
    Nassau..............................................             9.0             8.7             8.9             (*)             8.9             (*)
    New York............................................            11.6            11.5            12.2            11.7            11.7            11.8
    Orange..............................................             7.9             8.1             8.6           * 7.8             8.2           * 8.2
    Queens..............................................             9.5             9.4             9.3             8.5             9.4           * 9.1
    Richmond............................................             9.8             9.7            10.1             9.4             9.8            9.6*
    Rockland............................................              NM              NM              NM              NM              NM              NM
    Suffolk.............................................             8.1             8.4             8.8             7.9             8.4             8.4
    Westchester.........................................             9.1             8.8             9.3             (*)             9.1             (*)
CONNECTICUT:
    Fairfield...........................................             9.4             8.8            10.0             9.3             9.4             9.4
    New Haven...........................................             9.9             9.0            10.0             9.2             9.6             9.4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INC--All counties listed as INC did not meet 75 percent data completeness requirement for the relevant time period.
NM--No monitor located in county.
*--Missing 1 or more quarters.

                                Table 2--Design Value Concentrations for the PA-NJ-DE 1997 Annual PM2.5 Area ([mu]g/m\3\)
                                                            [The standard is 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Annual mean concentrations              Preliminary     2011 3-year     Preliminary
                                                         ------------------------------------------------   annual mean    annual design    2012 3-year
                                                                                                           concentration       value       annual design
               Nonattainment area counties                                                               --------------------------------      value
                                                               2009            2010            2011                                      ---------------
                                                                                                               2012          2009-2011       2010-2012
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW JERSEY:
    Camden..............................................             9.5            10.3            10.1             9.0             9.7             9.5
    Gloucester..........................................             9.3            10.0             9.4             9.4             9.3           * 9.3
    Burlington..........................................              NM              NM              NM              NM              NM              NM
DELAWARE:
    New Castle..........................................            11.2            11.7            10.3            10.3            10.7            10.4
PENNSYLVANIA:
    Bucks...............................................            10.8            10.5            11.5            10.7            10.9            10.9
    Chester.............................................            14.1            13.8            13.3             9.8            13.7          * 12.3

[[Page 38656]]

 
    Delaware............................................            12.4            13.5            12.9          * 12.8            12.9          * 13.1
    Montgomery..........................................            10.4             9.5            10.3             9.7            10.1             9.8
    Philadelphia........................................            11.1            11.0            11.4            16.4            11.2            13.4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NM--No monitor located in county.
*--Missing 1 or more quarters.

    Air monitoring data indicates that the NY-NJ-CT and the PA-NJ-DE 
nonattainment areas continue to meet the 1997 annual PM2.5 
NAAQS. EPA concludes that NY-NJ-CT and the PA-NJ-DE nonattainment areas 
are continuing to attain the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 
Therefore, EPA proposes that the statutory criterion for attainment of 
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS (40 CFR 50.7 and Appendix N of 
part 50) has been met.
2006 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS
    An area may be considered to be attaining the 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS if it meets the NAAQS as determined in 
accordance with 40 CFR 50.13 and Appendix N of part 50, based on three 
complete, consecutive calendar years of quality-assured air quality 
monitoring data. To attain this standard, the 98th percentile 24-hour 
concentration, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, 
Appendix N, is less than or equal to 35 [mu]g/m\3\ at all relevant 
monitoring sites in the subject area over a 3-year period. The relevant 
data must be collected and quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR 
part 58 and recorded in EPA's AQS. The monitors meet data completeness 
requirements when ``at least 75 percent of the scheduled sampling days 
for each quarter have valid data.'' The use of less than complete data 
is subject to the approval of EPA, which may consider factors such as 
monitoring site closures/moves, monitoring diligence, and nearby 
concentrations in determining whether to use such data.
    EPA previously finalized determinations that the NY-NJ-CT and PA-
NJ-DE nonattainment areas had attained the 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS, as noted in section IIA. EPA has also reviewed 
more recent quality-assured data for both NY-NJ-CT and the PA-NJ-DE 
nonattainment areas. The ambient air monitoring data submitted by New 
Jersey shows PM2.5 concentrations attaining the 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS for the 2009-2011 time period for both 
nonattainment areas.
    Table 3, below, shows the design value by county for the 98th 
percentile 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations for the 2009-2011 
time period for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for the NY-NJ-
CT PM2.5 nonattainment area monitors. Table 4 shows the 
design value by county for the 2009-2011 time period for the PA-NJ-DE 
nonattainment area monitors. Preliminary design values \11\ for the 
2010-2012 time period is also shown.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ All data for 2012 has been quality-assured.

                               Table 3--Design Value Concentrations for the NY-NJ-CT 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 Area ([mu]g/m\3\)
                                                             [The standard is 35 [mu]g/m\3\]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              98th percentile 24-hour concentrations        Preliminary   2011 3-year 24-   Preliminary
                                                         ------------------------------------------------      98th         hour design   2012 3-year 24-
                                                                                                          percentile 24-       value        hour design
               Nonattainment area counties                                                                     hour      ----------------      value
                                                               2009            2010            2011        concentration                 ---------------
                                                                                                         ----------------    2009-2011
                                                                                                               2012                          2010-2012
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW JERSEY:
    Bergen..............................................            27.1            25.1            23.5            19.2              25              23
    Essex...............................................             INC             INC            23.9            21.5             INC              23
    Hudson..............................................            29.2            25.9            28.2            24.6              28              26
    Mercer..............................................            23.0            26.9            27.7            20.5              26              25
    Middlesex...........................................            21.0            19.1            20.5          * 17.5              20            * 19
    Monmouth............................................              NM              NM              NM              NM              NM              NM
    Morris..............................................            20.9            22.7            24.4            18.2              23              21
    Passaic.............................................            26.1            24.4            25.4            21.4              25            * 24
    Somerset............................................              NM              NM              NM              NM              NM              NM
    Union...............................................            27.7            28.1            32.9            25.8              30              29
NEW YORK:
    Bronx...............................................            30.0            27.0            27.0            25.1              28              24
    Kings...............................................            26.9            24.8            24.3            22.1              25              24
    Nassau..............................................            25.8            20.2            23.1             (*)              23             (*)
    New York............................................            29.0            27.0            26.8            24.9              28              26
    Orange..............................................            20.6            26.5            20.8          * 20.2              23            * 23
    Queens..............................................            26.7            25.5            24.7            20.5              26            * 24
    Richmond............................................            24.6            25.5            23.2            22.1              24            * 24
    Rockland............................................              NM              NM              NM              NM              NM              NM

[[Page 38657]]

 
    Suffolk.............................................            21.6            26.1            21.7            18.7              23              22
    Westchester.........................................            27.0            26.7            22.7             (*)              25             (*)
CONNECTICUT:
    Fairfield...........................................            26.4            24.2            25.2            22.5              26              24
    New Haven...........................................            30.2            25.5            27.5            22.0              28              25
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NM--No monitor located in county.
INC--All counties listed as INC did not meet 75 percent data completeness requirement for the relevant time period.
*--Missing 1 or more quarters.

                               Table 4--Design Value Concentrations for the PA-NJ-DE 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 Area ([mu]g/m\3\)
                                                             [The standard is 35 [mu]g/m\3\]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              98th percentile 24-hour concentrations        Preliminary   2011 3-year 24-   Preliminary
                                                         ------------------------------------------------      98th         hour design   2012 3-year 24-
                                                                                                          percentile 24-       value        hour design
               Nonattainment area counties                                                                     hour      ----------------      value
                                                               2009            2010            2011        concentration                 ---------------
                                                                                                         ----------------    2009-2011
                                                                                                               2012                          2010-2012
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW JERSEY:
    Camden..............................................            25.0            23.4            24.3            19.8              24              23
    Gloucester..........................................            21.9            21.6            22.2            21.8              22            * 22
    Burlington..........................................              NM              NM              NM              NM              NM              NM
DELAWARE:
    New Castle..........................................            28.4            27.9            24.7            24.2              27              26
PENNSYLVANIA:
    Bucks...............................................            25.8            28.3            29.7            28.2              28              29
    Chester.............................................            31.1            35.1            33.8            24.1              33              31
    Delaware............................................            27.9            32.8            28.6          * 31.1              30            * 31
    Montgomery..........................................            27.2            25.9            27.6            21.8              27              25
    Philadelphia........................................            28.6            28.9            30.6            31.4              29              30
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NM--No monitor located in county.
*--Missing 1 or more quarters.

    Air monitoring data indicates that the NY-NJ-CT and the PA-NJ-DE 
nonattainment areas continue to meet the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 
NAAQS. EPA concludes that the NY-NJ-CT and the PA-NJ-DE nonattainment 
areas are continuing to attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 
Therefore, EPA proposes that the statutory criterion for attainment of 
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS (40 CFR 50.13 and Appendix N of 
part 50) has been met.

B. The Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and 
Part D of the CAA

    EPA has determined that the NNJ and the SNJ PM2.5 
nonattainment areas have met all SIP requirements applicable for 
purposes of this redesignation under section 110 of the CAA (General 
SIP Requirements) and that, upon final approval of the 2007 attainment 
year emissions inventory, as discussed below in this proposed 
rulemaking, it will have met all applicable SIP requirements under part 
D of Title I of the CAA, in accordance with CAA section 
107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, EPA is proposing to find that all 
applicable requirements of the New Jersey SIP for purposes of 
redesignation have been approved in accordance with CAA section 
107(d)(3)(E)(ii).
1. Section 110 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 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 CAA 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 requirements (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) of the CAA 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 the 
interstate transport of air pollutants in accordance with the 
NOX SIP Call, October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), amendments to 
the NOX

[[Page 38658]]

SIP Call, May 14, 1999 (64 FR 26298) and March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), 
and CAIR, May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162). However, the CAA 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 classifications 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, EPA does not believe that these requirements are applicable 
requirements for purposes of redesignation.
    In addition, EPA believes that the other CAA section 110(a)(2) 
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 area will still be subject to these 
requirements after it is redesignated. EPA concludes that the CAA 
section 110(a)(2) 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, and that CAA 
section 110(a)(2) elements not linked in the area's nonattainment 
status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation. This approach 
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, 
October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, 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, Ohio redesignation (65 FR 
at 37890, June 19, 2000) and in the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 
redesignation (66 FR at 53099, October 19, 2001).
    On April 10, 2013 (78 FR at 21296) EPA proposed action on New 
Jersey's section 110 ``infrastructure SIPs'' required under CAA section 
110(a)(2) that were submitted by the state. New Jersey submitted an 
infrastructure SIP on February 25, 2008 that addressed the 1997 annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS. On January 20, 2010 the state submitted an 
infrastructure SIP that addressed the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 
NAAQS. EPA will be acting on those SIPs under separate actions.
    EPA has reviewed the New Jersey SIP and has concluded that it meets 
the general SIP requirements under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA to the 
extent they are applicable for purposes for redesignating the NNJ and 
SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas to attainment for the 1997 
annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 
NAAQS. Notwithstanding the fact that EPA has not yet completed 
rulemaking on New Jersey's submittals for the PM2.5 
infrastructure SIP elements of section 110(a)(2), these requirements 
are, however, statewide requirements that are not linked to the 
PM2.5 nonattainment status of the NNJ and SNJ 
PM2.5 nonattainment areas. Therefore, EPA believes that 
these SIP elements are not applicable requirements for purposes of 
review of New Jersey's PM2.5 redesignation request.
2. Title I, part D nonattainment requirements
    Subpart 1 of part D of Title I of the CAA sets forth the basic 
nonattainment requirements applicable to all nonattainment areas. All 
areas that were designated nonattainment for the 1997 and 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS were designated under this subpart of the CAA, 
and the requirements applicable to them are contained in sections 172 
and 176. EPA's analysis of the particulate-matter-specific provisions 
of Subpart 4 of part D of Title I as a result of the January 4, 2013 
D.C. Circuit decision is discussed earlier in this notice.

Section 172 Requirements

    Under CAA section172, states with nonattainment areas must submit 
plans providing for timely attainment and meet a variety of other 
requirements. As mentioned, EPA has finalized determinations that the 
NY-NJ-CT and PA-NJ-DE nonattainment areas had attained the 1997 annual 
and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
    Notwithstanding that New Jersey's obligation to submit an 
attainment demonstration, RACT/RACM, RFP, contingency measures, and 
other planning SIPs related to the attainment of the PM2.5 
NAAQS has been suspended due to EPA's determination that the 
nonattainment areas attained the NAAQS, New Jersey had previously 
submitted a SIP revision (PM2.5 attainment plan) for 
attaining the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The SIP was submitted 
to EPA on April 1, 2009. EPA proposed to approve the PM2.5 
attainment plan on December 14, 2012 (77 FR 74421). As a result of the 
determination of attainment, the only remaining requirement to be 
considered is the emission inventory required under CAA section 
172(c)(3).
    The General Preamble for Implementation of Title I also discusses 
the evaluation of these requirements in the context of EPA's 
consideration of a redesignation request. The General Preamble sets 
forth EPA's view of applicable requirements for purposes of evaluating 
redesignation requests when an area is attaining the standard. See 
General Preamble for Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498, April 16, 
1992).
    Because attainment has been reached for the NY-NJ-CT and PA-NJ-DE 
nonattainment areas, no additional measures are needed to provide for 
attainment. CAA section 172(c)(1) requirements for an attainment 
demonstration and RACT/RACM are no longer considered to be applicable 
requirements for as long as the area continues to attain the standard 
until redesignation. See 40 CFR 51.1004(c). The RFP requirement under 
CAA section 172(c)(2) is similarly not relevant for purposes of 
redesignation.
    Section 172(c)(3) requires submission and approval of a 
comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions. As 
part of the maintenance plan submitted by New Jersey on December 26, 
2012, and further supplemented on May 3, 2013, the State has submitted 
an attainment year inventory that meets this requirement. For purposes 
of the PM2.5 NAAQS, the emissions inventory should address 
not only direct emissions of PM2.5, but also emissions of 
all precursors with the potential to participate in PM2.5 
formation, i.e., SO2, NOX, VOC and 
NH3. The 2007 attainment year emissions inventory submitted 
by New Jersey in the December 26, 2012 submission addressed 
PM2.5 (including condensables), SO2, and 
NOX emissions. The May 3, 2013 submission addressed VOC and 
NH3.
    The emissions cover the general source categories of point sources, 
area sources, onroad sources and nonroad sources. The proposed approval 
of the 2007 attainment year emissions inventory in this rulemaking 
action will, when finalized, meet the requirements of CAA section 
172(c)(3).
    The 2007 emissions inventory was prepared by NJDEP and is presented 
in Tables 7A and 7B located in section VI.E.2(a), Attainment Emissions 
Inventory, of this action. The tables show the 2007 base year 
PM2.5, NOx, SO2, VOC and 
NH3 annual emission inventories for the NNJ and SNJ 
PM2.5 nonattainment areas. EPA's detailed evaluation of the 
base year inventories for all pollutants are addressed in section 
VI.E.2.(a), Attainment Emissions

[[Page 38659]]

Inventory, of this action. A copy of the Technical Support Document 
\13\ submitted by New Jersey is included in the New Jersey SIP 
submission.
    Section 172(c)(4) of the CAA requires the identification and 
quantification of allowable emissions for major new and modified 
stationary sources in an area, and CAA section 172(c)(5) requires 
source permits for the construction and operation of new and modified 
major stationary sources anywhere in the nonattainment area. EPA has 
determined that, since the PSD requirements will apply after 
redesignation, areas being redesignated need not comply with the 
requirement that a nonattainment New Source Review (NSR) program be 
approved prior to redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates 
maintenance of the NAAQS without part D NSR. A more detailed rationale 
for this view is described in the memorandum from Mary Nichols, 
Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994 
entitled, ``Part D New Source Review Requirements for Areas Requesting 
Redesignation to Attainment.''
    New Jersey has not relied on a part D NSR program to maintain air 
quality for the 1997 annual PM2.5 and 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS. Moreover, because the NNJ and SNJ 
PM2.5 nonattainment areas are being redesignated to 
attainment by this action, Prevention of Significant Deterioration 
(PSD) requirements will be applicable to new or modified sources of 
PM2.5 in the area.
    New Jersey currently implements NSR in the thirteen nonattainment 
counties through the ``transitional'' NSR provisions contained in 
Appendix S of 40 CFR Part 51 and the USEPA policy memorandum dated July 
21, 2011, concerning interpollutant offsets. The Federal provisions and 
policy memorandum will be superseded once New Jersey revises its 
Emission Offset Rule N.J.A.C. 7:27-18.
    New Jersey does not have its own promulgated regulations as part of 
the SIP for part C Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) rules. 
New Jersey is appropriately implementing the PSD program through the 
delegated federal PSD regulations at 40 CFR 52.21. The program will 
become effective in the NNJ and SNJ areas upon redesignation to 
attainment.
    Section 172(c)(6) requires the SIP to contain control measures 
necessary to provide for attainment of the standard. Because attainment 
has been reached in the NY-NJ-CT and the PA-NJ-DE nonattainment areas, 
no additional control measures are needed to provide for attainment.
    Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to meet the applicable 
provisions of section 110(a)(2). As noted above, EPA believes the New 
Jersey SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2) applicable for 
purposes of redesignation.
    CAA section 172(c)(9) provides that SIPs in nonattainment areas 
``shall provide for the implementation of specific measures to be 
undertaken if the area fails to make reasonable further progress, or to 
attain the [NAAQS] by the attainment date applicable under this part. 
Such measures shall be included in the plan revision as contingency 
measures to take effect in any such case without further action by the 
State or [EPA].'' This contingency measure requirement is inextricably 
tied to the reasonable further progress and attainment demonstration 
requirements. Because attainment has been reached for the 1997 annual 
and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, contingency measures are 
not applicable for redesignation.
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 transportation conformity applies to 
transportation plans, programs and projects that are developed, funded 
or approved under Title 23 of the United States Code (U.S.C.) and the 
Federal Transit Act. The requirement to determine general conformity 
applies to all other federally supported or funded projects. State 
transportation conformity SIP revisions must be consistent with Federal 
transportation conformity regulations relating to consultation, 
enforcement and enforceability that EPA promulgated pursuant to its 
authority under the CAA \12\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Guidance on transportation conformity SIPs can be found at: 
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/policy/420b09001.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA interprets the conformity \13\ SIP requirements as not applying 
for purposes of evaluating a redesignation request under section 107(d) 
because 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 (6th Cir. 2001) (upholding this 
interpretation); see also 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995) (redesignation 
of Tampa, Florida).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ CAA section 176(c)(4)(E) requires states to submit 
revisions to their SIPs to reflect certain Federal criteria and 
procedures for determining transportation conformity. Transportation 
conformity SIPs are different from MVEBs that are established in 
control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) of the CAA

    Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) of the CAA requires that for an area to be 
redesignated the Administrator has fully approved the applicable 
implementation plan for the area under section 110(k).
    Upon final approval of New Jersey's 2007 attainment year emissions 
inventory, EPA will have fully approved the SIPs for the NNJ and SNJ 
PM2.5 nonattainment areas for the 1997 annual and 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS under section 110(k) for all requirements 
applicable for purposes of redesignation.
    EPA is proposing to approve the 2007 attainment year emissions 
inventory (submitted as part of its maintenance plan) for the NNJ and 
SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas as meeting the requirement of 
section 172(c)(3) of the CAA for the 1997 annual and 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS. Therefore, New Jersey will have satisfied all 
applicable requirements under part D of Title I of the CAA.

D. The Air Quality Improvement Must Be Permanent and Enforceable

    The improvement in air quality must be 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 (CAA section 
107(d)(3)(E)(iii)). EPA proposes to determine that the air quality 
improvement in New Jersey in the NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 
nonattainment areas is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in 
emissions resulting from implementation of the SIP, Federal measures, 
and other state adopted measures.
    New Jersey's redesignation submission cited a number of regulatory 
programs that provided for emission reductions of PM2.5, and 
PM2.5 precursors NOX, and SO2. New 
Jersey also included control measures for VOCs, which were not 
considered quantifiable precursors when the redesignation request was 
submitted, as they expected some PM2.5 benefit from the 
implementation of VOC control measures.
    The regulatory control measures for PM2.5, and 
PM2.5 precursors VOCs, NOX, and SO2, 
included in New Jersey's redesignation submission have been adopted 
into the SIP, which provided for emission reductions from 2002 to 2009, 
the year modeled for the attainment demonstration for the 1997

[[Page 38660]]

PM2.5 NAAQS. New Jersey also included additional measures 
that were adopted by the state, but not yet implemented, that would 
provide benefit after 2009. From 2002 to 2009, statewide emissions 
decreased significantly: PM2.5 emissions decreased by 34 
percent, NOX emissions have decreased by 39 percent, and 
SO2 emissions have decreased by 70 percent.
    Tables 5A and 5B below, show the State and Federal control 
measures, which provide emission reductions from 2002 to 2009. The 
tables also summarize the maintenance plan measures with quantifiable 
emission reductions that New Jersey is relying on to demonstrate 
maintenance; discussed in more detail in section VI.E below. Additional 
2002 to 2009 control measures that support the SIP but were not 
quantified, or are VOC only measures, are also shown.

                    Table 5A--New Jersey's 2002-2009 Control Measures That Reduce Emissions of PM2.5 and Its Precursors in New Jersey
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Targeted pollutants
                 Measure                  --------------------------------------------------------  Maintenance            Affected State rules
                                                NOX          PM2.5          SO2           VOC      plan measure
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (IM)              X   ............  ............            X             X   NJAC 7:27-15.
 Program.
NOX Budget Program (SIP Call)............            X   ............            X   ............  ............  NJAC 7:27-30.
Electric Generating Unit (EGU)--BL                   X             X             X   ............  ............  NA.
 England Administrative Consent Order
 (ACO).
EGUP-SEG--Consent Decree.................            X             X             X   ............            X   NA.
Refinery Consent Decree (Sunoco, Valero,             X             X             X             X             X   NA.
 ConocoPhillips).
Industrial, Commercial and Institutional             X   ............  ............  ............            X   NJAC 7:27-27.19.
 Boilers (ICI) Boilers, Turbines and
 Engines 2005.
Case by Case NOX and VOC (Facility                   X   ............  ............            X   ............  NJAC 7:27-16, 19.
 Specific Emission Limits or FSELs/
 Administrative Emission Limits or AELs).
Sewage and Sludge Incinerators...........            X   ............  ............  ............  ............  NJAC 7:27-19.28.
New Jersey Low Emission Vehicle (LEV)                X             X             X             X             X   NJAC 7:27-29.
 Program.
Municipal Waste Combustors (Incinerators)            X   ............  ............  ............  ............  NJAC 7:27-19.13.
Asphalt Production Plants................            X   ............  ............  ............            X   NJAC 7:27-19.9.
ICI Boilers 2009.........................            X   ............  ............  ............            X   NJAC 7:27-19.7.
EGU-High Electric Demand Day (HEDD)......            X   ............            X   ............  ............  NJAC 7:27-19.29.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Additional New Jersey Measures That Support the SIP
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stage I and II (Gasoline Transfer          ............  ............  ............            X   ............  NJAC 7:27-16.
 Operations)..
Architectural Coatings 2005..............  ............  ............  ............            X   ............  NJAC 7:27-23.
Consumer Products 2005...................  ............  ............  ............            X   ............  NJAC 7:27-24.
Mobile Equipment Refinishing (Auto body).  ............  ............  ............            X   ............  NJAC 7:27-16.
Solvent Cleaning.........................  ............  ............  ............            X   ............  NJAC 7:27-16.
Portable Fuel Containers 2005............  ............  ............  ............            X   ............  NJAC 7:27-24.
Mercury Rule.............................            X             X             X   ............  ............  NJAC 7:27-27.
Diesel Vehicle Retrofit Program..........  ............            X   ............  ............  ............  NJAC 7:27-32, 14.
Consumer Products 2009...................  ............  ............  ............            X   ............  NJAC 7:27-24.
Adhesives & Sealants.....................  ............  ............  ............            X   ............  NJAC 7:27-26.
Asphalt Paving (cutback and emulsified)..  ............  ............  ............            X   ............  NJAC 7:27-16.19.
Control Technology Guideline (CTG) Group   ............  ............  ............            X   ............  NJAC 7:27-16.7.
 1: Printing.
Portable Fuel Containers 2009............  ............  ............  ............            X   ............  NJAC 7:27-24.
Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR)...            X             X             X             X   ............  NJAC 7:27-8.
Prevention of Significant Deterioration              X             X             X             X   ............  NA.
 (PSD).
Energy Master Plan.......................            X             X             X             X   ............  NA.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Table 5B--Federal 2002-2009 Control Measures That Reduce Emissions of PM2.5 and Its Precursors in New Jersey
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Targeted pollutants
                  Measure                  --------------------------------------------------------  Maintenance
                                                 NOX          PM2.5          SO2           VOC      plan measure
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Residential Woodstove NSPS................            X             X   ............            X             X
Motor Vehicle Control Program (Tier 1 and             X             X             X             X             X
 Tier 2)..................................
Acid Rain Program.........................            X   ............            X   ............  ............
Nonroad Diesel Engine Standards...........            X             X   ............            X             X
Phase 2 Standards for New Nonroad Spark-              X   ............  ............            X             X
 Ignition Nonhandheld Engines at or below
 19 kW (lawn and garden)..................
Phase 2 Standards for Small Spark-Ignition            X   ............  ............            X             X
 Handheld Engines at or below 19 kW (lawn
 and garden)..............................
Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicle (HDDV) Defeat               X   ............  ............  ............  ............
 Device Settlement........................
Gasoline Boats and Personal Watercraft,               X             X   ............            X             X
 Outboard Engines.........................
National Low Emission Vehicle Program                 X             X   ............            X             X
 (NLEV)...................................

[[Page 38661]]

 
Large Industrial Spark-Ignition Engines               X   ............  ............  ............            X
 over 19 kW (>50 hp) Tier 1 and Tier 2....
Heavy-Duty Highway Rule--Vehicle Standards            X             X   ............            X             X
 and Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control...........
Diesel Marine Engines over 37 kW Category             X   ............  ............            X             X
 1 Tier 2, Category 2 Tier 2, Category 3
 Tier 1...................................
Recreational Vehicles (includes                       X   ............  ............            X             X
 snowmobiles, off-highway motorcycles, and
 all-terrain vehicles)....................
Locomotive Engines and Marine Compression-            X             X   ............            X             X
 Ignition Engines Less Than 30 Liters per
 Cylinder Tier 2 and Tier 3...............
USEPA Maximum Achievable Control            ............  ............  ............            X             X
 Technology (MACT) Standards including
 Industrial Boiler/Process Heater MACT....
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Tables 6A and 6B show additional post 2009 maintenance plan 
measures with creditable emission reductions, including measures that 
have been adopted but not yet implemented, that New Jersey is relying 
on to demonstrate maintenance; discussed in more detail in section VI.E 
below. New Jersey's submittal also included additional measures to 
provide additional assurance that the improvement in New Jersey's air 
quality will continue to improve.

                    Table 6A--New Jersey's Post 2009 Control Measures That Reduce Emissions of PM2.5 and Its Precursors in New Jersey
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Targeted pollutants
                 Measure                  --------------------------------------------------------  Maintenance            Affected State rules
                                                NOX          PM2.5          SO2           VOC      plan measure
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vehicle IM Program Revisions.............            X   ............  ............            X             X   NJAC 7:27-15.
Glass Manufacturing......................            X   ............  ............  ............            X   NJAC 7:27-19.10.
EGU--Coal, Oil, and Gas Fired Boilers....            X             X             X   ............            X   NJAC 7:27-4.2, 10.2, 19.4.
Low Sulfur Distillate and Residual Fuel              X   ............            X   ............            X   NJAC 7:27-9, 7:27-27.9.
 Strategies.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Table 6B--Federal Post 2009 Control Measures That Reduce Emissions of PM2.5 and Its Precursors in New Jersey
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Targeted pollutants
                  Measure                  --------------------------------------------------------  Maintenance
                                                 NOX          PM2.5          SO2           VOC      plan measure
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines             X             X   ............  ............            X
 MACT.....................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    New Jersey also presented data to demonstrate that the decline in 
PM2.5 concentrations was due primarily to permanent and 
enforceable control measures rather than the country's economic 
recession that began in 2007 and resulting downturn in energy use.
    Although electricity generation in New Jersey decreased by one 
percent from 2007 to 2009, electricity generation in New Jersey has 
experienced an overall increase of 5 percent from 2002 to 2011. In 
contrast, emission reductions have outpaced generation changes with 
decreases of 93, 84 and 72 percent for SO2, NOX 
and PM2.5, respectively, from 2000-2011, with significant 
emission reductions occurring prior to 2007. From 2007 to 2009, 
emission reductions for SO2, NOX and 
PM2.5 show decreases of 65, 51, and 46 percent, 
respectively.
    New Jersey also examined the onroad mobile sector to determine if 
statewide vehicle miles traveled (VMT) data declined and whether it was 
significant enough to affect air quality compared to emission 
reductions from ``fleet turnover''. ``Fleet turnover'' refers to the 
replacement of older, more polluting vehicles with newer vehicles that 
emit pollutants at lower levels as a result of the Federal ``Tier 2'' 
new vehicle emission standards (began with the 2004 model year), and 
further augmented by the California Low Emission Vehicle (LEV)II new 
vehicle emission standards (began with the 2009 model year in New 
Jersey).
    Based on yearly statewide data, VMT declined approximately 3.7 
percent in 2008 and 0.5 percent in 2009 after steady annual VMT 
increases of about two percent between 1996 and 2006. Between 2007 and 
2009, emissions of PM2.5 decreased by 23 percent, and 
NOX by 24 percent. An evaluation of onroad emissions data 
from 2002 to 2009 shows New Jersey emissions of PM2.5 
decreasing by approximately 39 percent and emissions of NOX 
decreasing by approximately 50 percent, even though VMT increased by 
4.5 to 6 percent. This suggests that fleet turnover, rather than 
changes in VMT, had a much greater impact on onroad emissions.
    New Jersey has demonstrated that actual enforceable emission 
reductions are responsible for the air quality

[[Page 38662]]

improvement. EPA proposes to find that the combination of existing EPA-
approved SIP and Federal measures contribute to the permanence and 
enforceability of reduction in ambient PM2.5 levels that 
have allowed New Jersey to attain the 1997 PM2.5 and 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS.

E. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to 
Section 175A of the CAA

    For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA 
requires EPA to determine that the area has a fully approved 
maintenance plan pursuant to section 175A of the CAA (CAA section 
107(d)(3)(E)(iv)). In conjunction with its request to redesignate the 
NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas to attainment for the 
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and the 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS, New Jersey submitted a SIP revision to provide 
for maintenance for at least 10 years after the effective date of 
redesignation to attainment. EPA believes this maintenance plan meets 
the requirements for approval under section 175A of the CAA.
1. 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 the Administrator 
approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after the 
redesignation, the State must submit a revised maintenance plan which 
demonstrates that attainment will continue to be maintained for the 10 
years following the initial 10-year period. To address the possibility 
of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must contain 
contingency measures as EPA deems necessary to assure prompt correction 
of any future PM2.5 violations. The Calcagni Memorandum, 
dated September 4, 1992, provides further guidance on the content of a 
maintenance plan, explaining that a maintenance plan should address 
five requirements: (1) An attainment emissions inventory; (2) a 
maintenance demonstration showing maintenance for 10 years; (3) a 
commitment to maintain the existing monitoring network; (4) 
verification of continued attainment; and (5) a contingency plan to 
prevent or correct future violations. As is discussed more fully below, 
EPA proposes to find that the New Jersey maintenance plan includes all 
the necessary components and is thus proposing to approve it as a 
revision to the New Jersey SIP.
2. Analysis of the Maintenance Plan
    The maintenance demonstration must demonstrate effective safeguards 
of the NAAQS for at least 10 years following the redesignation showing 
that future PM2.5 and precursor emissions will not exceed 
the level of the attainment year.
    States are required to submit the following inventory elements to 
satisfy the redesignation/maintenance plan inventory requirements:
    Maintenance Plan Attainment Inventory. Maintenance plan provisions 
include a comprehensive, accurate, and current emissions inventory from 
all point, area, nonroad and onroad mobile sources for the 
PM2.5 nonattainment area. States are required to develop an 
attainment inventory to identify the level of emissions in the area 
that is sufficient to attain the NAAQS. This inventory should include 
the emissions during the time period associated with the monitoring 
data showing attainment.
    Maintenance Plan Interim Year Inventory. At a minimum, emissions 
should be projected to a midpoint year between the attainment year and 
the endpoint/10-year inventory. This inventory provides a summary of 
controlled emissions for point, area, nonroad and onroad mobile sources 
for the PM2.5 nonattainment area for the interim year 
inventory.
    Maintenance Plan Projected Final Year Inventory. Emissions should 
be projected from the attainment year to at least 10 years into the 
future. This inventory provides a summary of controlled emissions for 
point, area, nonroad and onroad mobile sources at the endpoint/10-year 
period.
    For the NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas, 2007 
emissions were projected to 2017 and 2025. New Jersey must demonstrate, 
with the control programs identified in this SIP, that total 2017 or 
2025 projected emissions do not exceed the 2007 emission levels.
    Below are EPA's review and evaluation of the maintenance 
demonstration for the two areas. Additional detail is provided in the 
TSD.
(a) Attainment Emissions Inventory
    Selection of 2007 Base Year as the Maintenance Plan Attainment 
Year. Inventory An attainment inventory is comprised of the emissions 
during the time period associated with the monitoring data showing 
attainment. New Jersey selected 2007 as the attainment inventory year 
for the SNJ and NNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas for the 1997 
annual PM2.5 and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standards.
    For the 1997 PM2.5 annual standard, the NNJ 
nonattainment area had monitored attainment based on air monitoring 
data for 2007-2009; and the SNJ nonattainment area had monitored 
attainment based on air monitoring data for 2007-2009, and 2008-2010. 
Additionally, for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard, the NNJ 
PM2.5 nonattainment area had monitored attainment for 2007-
2009, and 2008-1010; and the SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment area 
had monitored attainment for 2008-2010, and 2009-2011.
    Historically for the attainment inventory, the state would select 
an attainment year inventory characterizing emissions in the 
maintenance area from one of the three years in the three-year period 
in which the state monitored attainment. For the SNJ PM2.5 
nonattainment area, New Jersey should have selected 2008 or 2009 as the 
attainment year inventory for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 
standard. However, the state believes that the 2007 inventory is an 
appropriate and representative inventory to use as a surrogate 
attainment inventory for the 2008 inventory for the SNJ 
PM2.5 nonattainment area for the 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 standard for several reasons discussed:
     The 2007 inventory is the most comprehensive inventory 
developed by states in the region for SIP purposes.
     For all of the available data, the monitors in the SNJ 
nonattainment area showed compliance with the 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 standard of 35 [mu]g/m\3\ during the 2007-2009 
monitoring period. However, there was some incomplete data for 2007 in 
the SNJ area that was not able to be addressed through data 
substitution and statistical analysis. Incomplete data also existed for 
the 2008-2010 monitoring period, but was able to be addressed through 
data substitution and statistical analysis.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See TSD in EPA Docket ID Number EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0371 at 
wwww.regulations.gov for discussion of EPA's procedure for 
addressing missing data not meeting completeness requirements for 
monitors in the PA-NJ-DE nonattainment area for the 2006 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The monitors in the NNJ PM2.5 nonattainment 
area showed compliance with the 35 [mu]g/m\3\ daily standard during the 
2007-2009 monitoring period.
     The 2007 and 2008 emission inventories are comparable, as 
demonstrated by a comparison of New Jersey's 2007 inventory with 
USEPA's 2008 National Emissions Inventory (NEI).

[[Page 38663]]

     Most important, comparison of the 2008 to the 2017 and 
2025 inventories, shows that emissions will continue to decrease and 
will be well below the 2007 and 2008 levels for PM2.5 and 
its precursors, NOX, and SO2, in the SNJ 
PM2.5 nonattainment area.
    For these reasons, the state selected the 2007 inventory as a 
surrogate for the 2008 inventory. EPA proposes to concur that the 2007 
base year emissions inventory is appropriate as the attainment year 
inventory for the PM2.5 redesignation maintenance plan.
    Criteria for Approval of the Maintenance Plan Attainment Year 
Inventory. There are general and specific components of an acceptable 
emission inventory. In general, the State must submit a revision to its 
SIP and the emission inventory must meet the minimum requirements for 
reporting by source category.
    For a base year emission inventory to be acceptable it must pass 
all of the following acceptance criteria:
    1. Evidence that the inventory was quality assured by the state and 
its implementation documented.
    2. The point source inventory must be complete.
    3. Point source emissions must have been prepared or calculated 
according to the current EPA guidance.
    4. The area source inventory must be complete.
    5. The area source emissions must have been prepared or calculated 
according to the current EPA guidance.
    6. Non-road mobile emissions were prepared according to current EPA 
guidance for all of the source categories.
    7. The method (e.g., Highway Performance Monitoring System or a 
network transportation planning model) used to develop VMT estimates 
must follow EPA guidance. The VMT development methods must be 
adequately described and documented in the inventory report.
    8. The Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES) model must be 
correctly used to produce emission factors for each of the vehicle 
classes.

EPA's Evaluation of the Maintenance Plan Attainment Year Inventory

Quality Assurance Plan Implementation
    The Quality Assurance (QA) plan was implemented for all portions of 
the inventory. QA checks were performed relative to data collection and 
analysis, and double counting of emissions from point, area and mobile 
sources. QA/QC checks were conducted to ensure accuracy of units, unit 
conversions, transposition of figures, and calculations.
Point and Area Source Inventories
    New Jersey's inventory includes major point sources based on 
specific thresholds for each pollutant in tons per year (tpy). The 
inventory report describes how point and area source activity levels 
and their associated parameters were developed, and how the data were 
used to calculate emission estimates. The inventory lists the source 
categories that are included in (and excluded from) the area source 
inventory. The report provides referenced documents for activity level 
and emission factors used. Information on how control efficiencies were 
derived (with the associated sample calculations) is also provided. 
Point and area source summary information on detailed county and/or 
nonattainment area levels, are included in the inventory. Where 
applicable, annual emissions are provided for PM2.5, 
NOx, SO2, VOC and NH3 for the 
PM2.5 nonattainment areas.
    The primary sources of anthropogenic NH3 emissions are 
two agricultural operations, livestock and fertilizer. NH3 
emissions from livestock and fertilizer were prepared by the USEPA 
using the Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) Ammonia Model, version 6. 
The model runs are based on 2007 activity levels. NH3 
emissions for industrial refrigeration, composting, and publicly owned 
treatment works were prepared by the USEPA.
Nonroad Mobile Source Inventory
    For New Jersey, the predominant non-road mobile source categories 
(i.e., agricultural equipment, construction equipment, industrial 
equipment, airport service equipment, light commercial equipment, lawn 
and garden equipment,etc.) were developed by the Nonroad Emissions 
Equipment Model 2008 released by EPA's Office of Transportation and Air 
Quality (OTAQ). Nonroad mobile source emissions are presented on a 
source category, county and/or nonattainment area basis. Where 
applicable, annual emissions are provided for PM2.5, 
NOX, SO2, VOC and NH3 for the 
PM2.5 nonattainment areas.
Aircraft, Locomotive and Commercial Marine Vessel Inventories
    Where applicable, aircraft, locomotive, and commercial marine 
vessel emissions on a county and/or nonattainment area basis are 
provided for PM2.5, NOX, SO2, VOC and 
NH3. Activity level and emissions data for each source 
category is provided. Aircraft, locomotive and commercial marine vessel 
source emissions are presented on a source category, county and/or 
nonattainment area basis. Where applicable, annual emissions are 
provided for PM2.5, NOX, SO2, VOC and 
NH3 for PM2.5 nonattainment areas.
Onroad Mobile Source Inventory
    New Jersey's mobile source inventory was developed by using the 
travel demand model (TDM) used by the two Metropolitan Planning 
Organizations in the States as the basis for estimating actual county 
level and functional class VMT estimates. Estimates were developed from 
the aforementioned sources for each roadway functional class, by 
county, in each of the PM2.5 nonattainment areas. MOVES2010a 
Model was used to generate emission factors for on-road vehicle 
emission estimates. It provides the sources for the key inputs into the 
mobile source emissions model. Key assumptions are also included. Where 
applicable, PM2.5, NOX, SO2, VOC and 
NH3 mobile emissions are presented on county and/or 
nonattainment area basis. Where applicable, annual emissions are 
provided for PM2.5, NOX, SO2, VOC and 
NH3 for PM2.5 nonattainment areas.
    Tables 7A and 7B below show the 2007 base year PM2.5, 
NOX, SO2, VOC and NH3 annual emission 
inventories for the NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas.

                                   Table 7A--2007 NNJ Area Base Year Inventory
                                                 [In tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Pollutant                  Point           Area       Nonroad mobile   Onroad mobile       Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM 2.5..........................           4,937           5,498           2,497           3,677          16,610
NOX.............................          15,828          16,122          39.457          93,385         164,793
SOX.............................          20,360           4,983           5,761             586          31,690
VOC.............................           7,584          60,560          26,833          47,490         142,667

[[Page 38664]]

 
NH3.............................             804           2,909              37           2,101           5,840
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                   Table 7B--2007 SNJ Area Base Year Inventory
                                                 [In tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Pollutant                  Point           Area       Nonroad mobile   Onroad mobile       Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM 2.5..........................             800           2,837             560           1,055           5,159
NOX.............................           4,453           3,483           6,790          26,992          41,718
SOX.............................           2,034           1,128           1,642             161           4,965
VOC.............................           2,041          17,184           6,490          10,880          36,594
NH3.............................              53           1,032              12             462           1,559
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA is proposing to approve the 2007 base year inventory for 
PM2.5, NOX, SO2, VOC and 
NH3 for the NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment 
areas. The 2007 Maintenance Plan Attainment Year/Base Year emissions 
inventory is comprehensive, accurate, and current for all sources of 
relevant pollutants in the nonattainment area. In all cases the 2007 
attainment/base year inventory was done in accordance with EPA 
guidance. The technical support document provides additional 
information regarding the review conducted by EPA for the 2007 
PM2.5 base year inventory.
(b) 2017 Interim and 2025 End Year Projection Inventories
    Criteria for Approval of the 2017 Interim and 2025 Projection End 
Year Inventories. There are general and specific components for 
acceptable 2017 Maintenance Plan Interim and 2025 End Year Projection 
Inventories. In general, the State must submit a revision to its SIP 
and the aforementioned components must meet certain minimum 
requirements for reporting by source category.
    For the projection inventories to be acceptable they must pass the 
following acceptance criteria: \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Emission Inventory Improvement Program guidance document 
titled Volume X, Emission Projections, dated December 1999
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. Were the 2017 and 2025 projection inventories developed in 
accordance with the procedures outlined in EPA's latest guidance?
    2. Were the Plans developed in accordance with EPA's latest 
guidance for Growth Factors, Projections, and Control Strategies for 
Reasonable Progress Goal Plans?
    EPA's Evaluation of the Maintenance Plan 2017 Interim and 2025 End 
Year Projection Inventories. A projection of 2007 PM2.5, 
NOX, and SO2 anthropogenic emissions to 2017 and 
2025 is required to determine the emission reductions needed for 
inventory maintenance plan. The 2017 and 2025 projection year emission 
inventories are calculated by multiplying the 2007 base year inventory 
by factors which estimate growth from 2007 to 2017 and 2025. A specific 
growth factor for each source type in the inventory is required since 
sources typically grow at different rates.
Major Point Sources
Electric Generating Units (EGU) and Non-Electric Generating Units (Non-
EGUs)
    For the major point source category, the projected emissions 
inventories were first calculated by estimating growth in each source 
category. As appropriate, the 2007 emissions inventory was used as the 
base for applying factors to account for inventory growth. The point 
source inventory was grown from the 2007 inventory to 2017 and 2025 for 
each facility using growth factors utilized in New Jersey's Emissions 
Statement Program, US Department of Energy's (USDOE) Annual Energy 
Outlook projections, and NJ Department of Labor statistics.
Area Sources
    For the area source category, New Jersey projected emissions from 
2007 to 2017 and 2025 using growth factors generated from USDOE 2011 
Annual Energy Outlook, and state-supplied population and employment 
data, where appropriate.
Non-Road Mobile Sources
Nonroad Vehicle Equipment Emissions
    Non-road vehicle equipment emissions were projected from 2007 to 
2017 and 2025 using the EPA's NONROAD 2008a model (July 2009 version). 
This model was used to calculate past and future emission inventories 
for all nonroad equipment categories except commercial marine vessels, 
locomotives and aircrafts. Emissions were determined on a monthly basis 
and combined to provide annual emission estimates.
Aircrafts, Locomotives and Commercial Marine Vessels (CMV)
    Aircraft emissions were projected from 2007 to 2017 and 2025 based 
on landing and takeoff growth factors from the Federal Aviation 
Administration Terminal Area Forecast System for 2009-2030.
    Locomotives emissions were projected from 2007 to 2017 and 2025 
based on combined growth and control factors from EPA's regulatory 
impact analysis (RIA) in May 2008 for control of locomotive engines and 
USDOE's 2006 Annual Energy Outlook report.
    CMV emissions were projected to 2017 and 2025 using EPA's May 2008 
RIA report, for category 1 and 2 vessels and EPA's 2009 RIA report for 
category 3 vessels based on combined growth and control factors.
Onroad Mobile Sources
    For the onroad mobile source category, the primary indicator and 
tool for developing on-road mobile growth and expected emissions are 
VMT and US EPA's mobile emissions model MOVES2010a. Projection years 
2017 and 2025 pollutant emission factors were generated by MOVES2010a 
(with the associated controlled measures applied, where appropriate) 
and applied to the monthly VMT projections provided by the State. 
Monthly emissions were then combined to develop annual emission 
estimates.
    Tables 8A-8C and 9A-9C, show the 2017 and 2025 projection emission 
inventories controlled after 2007 using the aforementioned growth 
indicators/

[[Page 38665]]

methodologies for the NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas, 
respectively.

    Table 8A--Comparison of 2007, 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 Emission Totals by Source Sector (tpy) for the NNJ Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      PM2.5
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Net change
                     Sector                            2007            2017            2025          2008-2025
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................................           4,937           3,131           3,243  ..............
Area............................................           5,498           5,436           5,616  ..............
Nonroad.........................................           2,497           1,725           1,410  ..............
On-road.........................................           3,677           1,874           1,218  ..............
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................          16,610          12,227          11,487          -5,123
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Table 8B--Comparison of 2007, 2017 and 2025 NOX Emission Totals by Source Sector (tpy) for the NNJ Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       NOX
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Net change
                     Sector                            2007            2017            2025          2008-2025
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................................          15,828          13,512           4,126  ..............
Area............................................          16,122          15,969           3,429  ..............
Nonroad.........................................          39,457          27,050           4,998  ..............
On-road.........................................          93,385          45,687          13,504  ..............
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................         164,793         102,218          26,057        -138,736
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Table 8C--Comparison of 2007, 2017 and 2025 SO2 Emission Totals by Source Sector (tpy) for the NNJ Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       SO2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Net change
                     Sector                            2007            2017            2025          2008-2025
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................................          20,360           3,583           1,245  ..............
Area............................................           4,983             452             102  ..............
Nonroad.........................................           5,761             719             105  ..............
On-road.........................................             586             531             129  ..............
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................          31,690           5,295           1,579         -30,111
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 9A--Comparison of 2007, 2017 and 2025 PM2.5 Emission Totals by Source Sector (tpy) for the SNJ Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      PM2.5
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Net change
                     Sector                            2007            2017            2025          2008-2025
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................................             800             818             858  ..............
Area............................................           2,837           2,243           2,651  ..............
Nonroad.........................................             560             372             315  ..............
On-road.........................................           1,055             616             278  ..............
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................           5,159           4,549           4,102          -1,057
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Table 9B--Comparison of 2007, 2017 and 2025 NOx Emission Totals by Source Sector (tpy) for the SNJ Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       NOX
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Net change
                     Sector                            2007            2017            2025          2008-2025
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................................           4,453           4,126           4,433  ..............
Area............................................           3,483           3,429           3,427  ..............

[[Page 38666]]

 
Nonroad.........................................           6,790           4,998           3,915  ..............
On-road.........................................          26,992          13,504           6,095  ..............
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................          41,718          26,057          17,870         -23,848
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Table 9C--Comparison of 2007, 2017 and 2025 SO2 Emission Totals by Source Sector (tpy) for the SNJ Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       SO2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Net change
                     Sector                            2007            2017            2025          2008-2025
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................................           2,034           1,245           1,355  ..............
Area............................................           1,128             102             260  ..............
Nonroad.........................................           1,642             105             141  ..............
On-road.........................................             161             129             161  ..............
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................           4,965           1,579           1,880          -3,085
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The permanent and enforceable control measures that are relied on 
to provide continued attainment or maintenance of the 1997 annual and 
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS are listed as maintenance plan 
measures in tables 5 (A thru B) and 6 (A thru B). New Jersey has 
already implemented, or adopted these control measures, some with 
future implementation dates. Additional information regarding the 
control measures can be found in the TSD. EPA is proposing to approve 
the 2017 interim and 2025 projection inventories for PM2.5, 
NOX and SO2 for the NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 
nonattainment areas. In all cases the 2017 and 2025 projection year 
inventories were performed in accordance with EPA guidance. For further 
information concerning EPA's evaluation and analysis of the emission 
inventories, see the TSD available in the docket.
    Tables 8A-9C above show the inventories for the 2007 attainment 
year, the 2017 interim year, and the 2025 endpoint year for the NNJ and 
SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas. Table 8A-9C show that between 
2007 and 2017, the NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas, 
are projected to reduce SO2, NOX and 
PM2.5 emissions substantially. Between 2007 and 2025, the 
NNJ and SNJ areas are projected to reduce emissions well below the 2007 
attainment inventory emission levels for all three pollutants. Thus, 
the projected emissions inventories show that the NNJ and SNJ areas 
will continue to maintain the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS during the 10 year maintenance period.
Maintenance Demonstration Thru 2025
    As noted in section VI.E.1, CAA section 175A requires a state 
seeking redesignation to attainment to submit a SIP revision to provide 
for the maintenance of the NAAQS in the area ``for at least 10 years 
after the redesignation.'' EPA has interpreted this as a showing of 
maintenance ``for a period of 10 years following redesignation.'' See 
Calcagni Memorandum. Where the emissions inventory method of showing 
maintenance is used, its purpose is to show that emissions during the 
maintenance period will not increase over the attainment year 
inventory. See Calcagni Memorandum.
    As discussed in detail above, the State's maintenance plan 
submission expressly documents that the NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 
nonattainment areas' emissions inventories will remain below the 
attainment year inventories through at least 2025. In addition, for the 
reasons set forth below, EPA proposes to determine that the State's 
submission further demonstrates that the NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 
nonattainment areas will continue to maintain the 1997 annual and 2006 
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS at least through 2025:
     As explained in the previous section, levels of 
SO2, NOX, and PM2.5 are projected to 
decrease substantially between 2007 and 2025. EPA believes that it is 
highly improbable that sudden increases would occur that could exceed 
the attainment year inventory levels in 2025.
     Air quality concentrations for PM2.5 are 1 to 2 
[mu]g/m\3\ or more under the NAAQS level, indicating a margin of safety 
in the event of any emissions increase. As shown in tables 1 and 2, for 
the 1997 annual NAAQS of 15 [mu]g/m\3\, the design value for 2009-2011 
for the NY-NJ-CT PM2.5 nonattainment area value was 11.7 
[mu]g/m\3\; and the design value for 2009-2011 for the PA-NJ-DE 
PM2.5 nonattainment area was measured at 13.7 [mu]g/m\3\. As 
shown in tables 3 and 4, for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS of 35 
[mu]g/m\3\, the design value for 2009-2011 for the NY-NJ-CT 
PM2.5 nonattainment area was 30 [mu]g/m\3\; and the design 
value for 2009-2011 for the PA-NJ-DE PM2.5 nonattainment 
area was measured at 33 [mu]g/m\3\.
     Air quality concentrations showed a significant downward 
trend over time for both the NY-NJ-CT and PA-NJ-DE PM2.5 
nonattainment areas for both the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 
See figures 3 thru 6 of the New Jersey redesignation request, which is 
available in the docket.
     Additional emissions reductions will occur now, and in the 
future, from EPA's Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) \16\, New 
Jersey's Diesel Retrofit Program, NJDEP's amended Administrative 
Consent Order with B.L. England, and from New Jersey's Clean 
Construction Program. See the TSD for more information regarding these 
measures, including expected emission reductions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 77 FR 9304 (February 16, 2012).

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

[[Page 38667]]

(c) Maintenance Plan and Evaluation of Precursors
    With regard to the redesignation of NNJ and SNJ areas, in 
evaluating the effect of the D.C. Circuit's remand of EPA's 
implementation rule, which included presumptions against consideration 
of VOC and NH3 as PM2.5 precursors, in this 
proposal EPA is also considering the impact of the decision on the 
maintenance plan required under sections 175A and 107(d)(3)(E)(iv). To 
begin with, EPA notes that the area has attained the 1997 and 2006 
PM2.5 standards and that the state, as shown below, has 
shown that attainment of that standard is due to permanent and 
enforceable emission reductions.
    EPA proposes to determine that the State's maintenance plan shows 
continued maintenance of the 1997 PM2.5 and 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS by tracking the levels of the precursors whose 
control brought about attainment of the standards in the NNJ and SNJ 
nonattainment areas. EPA therefore determines that the additional 
consideration related to the maintenance plan requirements that results 
from the Court's January 4, 2013 decision is that of assessing the 
potential role of VOC and NH3 in demonstrating continued 
maintenance in this area. As explained below, based upon documentation 
provided by the State and supporting information, EPA believes that the 
maintenance plan for the NNJ and SNJ nonattainment areas need not 
include any additional emission reductions of VOC or NH3 in 
order to provide for continued maintenance of the standard.
    First, as noted above in EPA's discussion of section 189(e), VOC 
emission levels in this area have historically been well-controlled 
under SIP requirements related to ozone and other pollutants. Second, 
total NH3 emissions for the NNJ and SNJ area are very low, 
estimated to be less than 6,000 and 1,600 tons per year, respectively. 
See Tables 7A and 7B. This amount of NH3 emissions appears 
especially small in comparison to the total amounts of SO2, 
NOX, and even PM2.5 emissions from sources in the 
areas. Third, as described below, available information shows that no 
precursor, including VOC and NH3, is expected to increase 
over the maintenance period so as to interfere with or undermine the 
State's maintenance demonstration.
    NNJ and SNJ areas' maintenance plans show that emissions of direct 
PM2.5, SO2, and NOX are projected to 
decrease substantially over the maintenance period. See Tables 8A-9C. 
In addition, emissions inventories used in the RIA for the 2012 
PM2.5 NAAQS show that VOC and NH3 emissions for 
the NNJ and SNJ areas are projected to decrease substantially from 2007 
through 2020. See Tables 10A and 10B below. While the RIA emissions 
inventories are only projected out to 2020, there is no reason to 
believe that this downward trend would not continue through 2025. Given 
that the NNJ and SNJ areas are already attaining the 1997 
PM2.5 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS with the current level 
of emissions from sources in the area, the downward trend of emissions 
inventories would be consistent with continued attainment. Indeed, 
projected emissions reductions for the precursors that the State is 
addressing for purposes of the 1997 PM2.5 and 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS indicate that the areas should continue to 
attain the NAAQS following the precursor control strategy that the 
state has already elected to pursue. Even if VOC and NH3 
emissions were to increase unexpectedly between 2020 and 2025, the 
overall emissions reductions projected in direct PM2.5, 
SO2, and NOX would be sufficient to offset any 
increases. For these reasons, EPA proposes to determine that local 
emissions of all of the potential PM2.5 precursors will not 
increase to the extent that they will cause monitored PM2.5 
levels to violate the 1997 PM2.5 and 2006 PM2.5 
standards during the maintenance period.
     
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ These emissions estimates were taken from the emissions 
inventories developed for the RIA for the 2012 PM2.5 
NAAQS.
    \18\ These emissions estimates were taken from the emissions 
inventories developed for the RIA for the 2012 PM2.5 
NAAQS.

                     Table 10A--Comparison of 2007 and 2020 VOC and NH3 Emission Totals by Source Sector (tpy) for the NNJ Area \17\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                VOC                                             NH3
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Sector                                                             Net change                                      Net change
                                                               2007            2020          2007-2020         2007            2020          2007-2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...................................................           7,150           7,508  ..............             852           1,301  ..............
Area....................................................          59,925          60,657  ..............           2,810           2,872  ..............
Nonroad.................................................          29,203          16,613  ..............              28              34  ..............
On-road.................................................          44,389          15,285  ..............           2,433           1,243  ..............
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................................         140,667         100,063         -40,604           6,123           5,450            -703
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     Table 10B--Comparison of 2007 and 2020 VOC and NH3 Emission Totals by Source Sector (tpy) for the SNJ Area \18\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                VOC                                             NH3
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Sector                                                             Net change                                      Net change
                                                               2007            2020          2007-2020         2007            2020          2007-2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...................................................           1,874           1,837  ..............             123             159  ..............
Area....................................................          18,140          18,488  ..............           1,075           1,103  ..............
Nonroad.................................................           7,023           3,890  ..............              10              12  ..............
On-road.................................................           9,072           3,295  ..............             469             263  ..............
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................................          36,109          27,150          -8,959           1,677           1,527            -150
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 38668]]

    In addition, available air quality modeling analyses show continued 
maintenance of the standard during the maintenance period. The modeling 
analysis conducted for the RIA for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 
indicates that the design value for this area is expected to continue 
to decline through 2020. In the RIA analysis, the 2020 modeled design 
value is 10.8 [mu]g/m\3\ for the NY-NJ-CT nonattainment area, and 9.4 
[mu]g/m\3\ for the PA-NJ-DE nonattainment area. Given that precursor 
emissions are projected to decrease through 2025, it is reasonable to 
conclude that monitored PM2.5 levels in this area will also 
continue to decrease through 2025.
    Thus, EPA proposes to determine that there is ample justification 
to conclude that the NNJ and SNJ areas should be redesignated, even 
taking into consideration the emissions of other precursors potentially 
relevant to PM2.5. After consideration of the D.C. Circuit's 
January 4, 2013 decision, and for the reasons set forth in this notice, 
EPA proposes to approve the State's maintenance plan and its request to 
redesignate the NNJ and SNJ nonattainment areas to attainment for the 
1997 PM2.5 annual and the 2006 PM2.5 24-hour 
standards.
(d) Monitoring Network
    New Jersey has committed to tracking the air quality for continued 
attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS, and will work with EPA prior 
to making any changes to the existing PM2.5 air monitoring 
network.
    The State is obligated to work with EPA each year through the air 
monitoring network review process, as required by 40 CFR Part 58 to 
determine: (1) The adequacy of the PM2.5 monitoring network; 
(2) if additional monitoring is needed; and (3) if/when sites can be 
discontinued or relocated. Any changes to the monitoring network, 
including replacing or moving monitor(s) to new locations, as 
necessary, will be made through the air monitoring network review 
process. This review process undergoes a public comment period, and is 
subject to approval by the EPA. Air monitoring data will continue to be 
quality assured according to requirements in 40 CFR Part 58.
    EPA proposes to conclude that the State of New Jersey has met the 
requirement for continuing to operate an appropriate air monitoring 
network.
(e) Verification of Continued Attainment
    Continued attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS in the state 
depends, in part, on the state's efforts towards tracking indicators of 
continued attainment during the maintenance period. New Jersey's plan 
for verifying continued attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS 
consists of continued ambient PM2.5 air quality monitoring 
in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR Part 58. New Jersey will 
also continue to develop and submit periodic emission inventories as 
required by the Federal Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (codified 
at 40 CFR Part 51, subpart A).
    EPA proposes to approve New Jersey's plans for verifying continued 
attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS.
(f) Contingency Measures in the Maintenance Plan
    Section 175A of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include 
such contingency provision as EPA deems necessary to ensure 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 measures with respect to control of the 
pollutant(s) that were contained in the SIP before redesignation of the 
area to attainment. See section 175A(d) of the CAA.
    As required by section 175A of the CAA, New Jersey has included 
contingency provisions in the maintenance plan to address possible 
future annual PM2.5 air quality problems. New Jersey will 
use the following triggers to determine the cause of elevated levels, 
and implement contingency measures, as necessary, in accordance with 
the described schedule:
    1. If monitored PM2.5 concentrations in any year exceed 
the level of the NAAQS, NJDEP will perform a data assessment to 
determine the cause of the violation. This assessment will be performed 
when the annual average PM2.5 concentration for the previous 
year exceeds 15 [mu]g/m\3\ at any New Jersey monitoring site, or when 
the 98th percentile of the 24-hour average daily concentrations exceeds 
35 [mu]g/m\3\ at any New Jersey air monitoring site. NJDEP will perform 
this evaluation within six months of the data certification. New Jersey 
will work with the other states in its shared multi-state nonattainment 
areas as necessary.
    2. If annual or 24-hour PM2.5 design values exceed 15 
[mu]g/m\3\ or 35 [mu]g/m\3\, respectively, NJDEP will evaluate all 
appropriate data to determine the cause using the same analyses 
discussed in Item number 1. NJDEP will perform this evaluation within 
six months of the determination of a violation.
    3. Based on any findings, New Jersey will make a judgment on 
whether the violation was caused by an exceptional event or a violation 
of an existing rule or permit. The State will rely on one or more of 
the following contingency measures for any other violation:

--Onroad Vehicle Fleet Turnover
--Nonroad Vehicle and Equipment Fleet Turnover
--Low Sulfur Fuel Rule N.J.A.C. 7:27-9 (prior to July 2016)
--Diesel Retrofit Program, Diesel Inspection and Maintenance Program, 
N.J.A.C. 7:27-14 and 32

    4. If necessary, New Jersey will evaluate the feasibility and 
applicability of additional measures, how they relate to the cause and 
location of the violation, and if these additional measures would 
correct the violation. These may include:

--New control measures that have been adopted for other purposes

--Residential wood burning strategies
--Fugitive dust reductions at stationary sources
--Lower particulate limits for No. 6 fuel oil-fired boilers
--Lower particulate limits for stationary diesel engines
--Working with the local metropolitan planning agencies to implement 
transportation control measures

    NJDEP will perform this evaluation within six months of the 
determination of a violation. If it is determined that a new rule is 
required or appropriate to correct a violation of the NAAQS, NJDEP will 
propose a new rule within 18 month, and take final action within 30 
months, of the determination of a violation.
    New Jersey is relying on existing measures, which are already 
implemented, or have been adopted with future implementation dates, to 
promptly correct any violation of the NAAQS. The state has also 
included a commitment to further evaluate additional measures, if 
necessary and appropriate. EPA proposes to find that the New Jersey 
maintenance plan includes appropriate contingency measures to promptly 
correct any violation of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation.
Maintenance Plan Conclusion
    For all of the reasons discussed above, EPA is proposing to approve 
New Jersey's 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 maintenance 
plan for the NNJ and

[[Page 38669]]

SNJ areas as meeting the requirements of section 175A of the CAA.

VII. What is EPA's analysis of New Jersey's proposed NOX and 
PM2.5 motor vehicle emission budgets?

    Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation plans, 
programs, and 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 the NAAQS or any interim milestones. 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 SIP. The regional 
emissions analysis is one, but not the only, requirement for 
implementing transportation conformity. Transportation conformity is a 
requirement for nonattainment and maintenance areas.
    Under the CAA, states are required to submit, at various times, 
control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans for nonattainment areas. 
These control strategy SIPs (including RFP and attainment 
demonstrations) and maintenance plans create motor vehicle emissions 
budgets (MVEBs or budgets) for criteria pollutants and/or their 
precursors to address pollution from cars and trucks. Per 40 CFR Part 
93, an MVEB must be established for the last year of the maintenance 
plan. A state may adopt MVEBs for other years as well. The MVEB is the 
portion of the total allowable emissions in the maintenance 
demonstration that is allocated to highway and transit vehicle use and 
emissions. The 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 the MVEB in 
the SIP and how to revise the MVEB.
    New Jersey has developed MVEBs for both the NNJ and SNJ 
nonattainment areas. The budgets are being established for both the 
1997 annual and 2006 daily PM2.5 standards. New Jersey 
determined that budgets based on annual emissions of direct 
PM2.5 and NOX, a precursor, are appropriate for 
the 2006 daily standard because exceedences of the standard were not 
isolated to one particular season; therefore, the budgets established 
by this maintenance plan will be used by transportation agencies to 
meet conformity requirements for both the annual and daily standards.
    New Jersey developed these MVEBs, as required, for the last year of 
its maintenance plan, 2025, and an additional year, 2009, for the 
purpose of establishing budgets for the near-term based on EPA's MOVES 
model. Previously established and approved MVEBs had been based on 
MOBILE6.2.
    The 2009 MVEB was developed without an accompanying full emissions 
inventory. EPA proposes to approve this approach that is consistent 
with attainment and maintenance of both the 1997 and 2006 
PM2.5 standards because of our earlier determinations that 
both the NY-NJ-CT and the PA-NJ-DE nonattainment areas had attained the 
standards based on monitored air quality that included the year 2009 
(see section II.A.).
    The MVEBs for 2025 reflect the total on-road emissions for 2025, 
plus an allocation from the available NOX and 
PM2.5 safety margins. Under 40 CFR 93.101, the term ``safety 
margin'' is the difference between the attainment level (from all 
sources) and the projected level of emissions (from all sources) in the 
maintenance plan. The safety margin can be allocated to the 
transportation sector; however, the total emissions must remain below 
the attainment level. New Jersey chose to add 8% of the available 
safety margin to both the PM2.5 and NOX budgets 
for 2025 for both the NNJ and SNJ nonattainment areas. The 
NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs and safety margin allocations 
were developed in consultation with the transportation partners and 
were added to accommodate expected future improvements to MOVES model 
inputs and methodologies.
    In the submittal, the State has also established ``sub-area 
budgets'' for the two metropolitan planning organizations (MPO) within 
the NNJ nonattainment area: the North Jersey Transportation Planning 
Authority (NJTPA) and the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission 
(DVRPC). These sub-area budgets allow each MPO to work independently to 
demonstrate conformity by meeting its own PM2.5 and 
NOX budgets. Each MPO must still verify, however, that the 
other MPO currently has a conforming long range transportation plan and 
transportation improvement program (TIP) prior to making a new plan/TIP 
conformity determination. The MVEBs for both the NNJ and SNJ areas are 
defined in Tables 11 (A thru D) below.

  Table 11A--2009 PM[ihel2].[ihel5] and NOX MVEBs for NNJ for Both the
           1997 Annual and 2006 Daily PM[ihel2].[ihel5] NAAQS
                               [Tons/year]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Direct
                    MPO/Subarea                       PM2.5       NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NJTPA.............................................      2,736     67,272
DVRPC (Mercer County).............................        224      5,835
------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Table 11B--2025 PM[ihel2].[ihel5] and NOX MVEBs for NNJ for Both the
           1997 Annual and 2006 Daily PM[ihel2].[ihel5] NAAQS
                               [Tons/year]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Direct
                MPO/Subarea                 PM[ihel2].[ihel5]     NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NJTPA.....................................          1,509         25,437
DVRPC (Mercer County).....................            119          2,551
------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Table 11C--2009 PM[ihel2].[ihel5] and NOX MVEBs for SNJ for Both the
           1997 Annual and 2006 Daily PM[ihel2].[ihel5] NAAQS
                               [Tons/year]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Direct
                    MPO                     PM[ihel2].[ihel5]     NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DVRPC (Burlington, Camden, and Gloucester             680         18,254
 Counties)................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Table 11D--2025 PM[ihel2].[ihel5] and NOX MVEBs for SNJ for Both the
           1997 Annual and 2006 Daily PM[ihel2].[ihel5] NAAQS
                               [Tons/year]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Direct
                    MPO                     PM[ihel2].[ihel5]     NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DVRPC (Burlington, Camden, and Gloucester             363          8,003
 Counties)................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As mentioned above, New Jersey has chosen to allocate a portion of 
the available safety margin to the NOX and PM2.5 
MVEBs for 2025. Details of this allocation are shown in Tables 12 (A 
thru D) below.

[[Page 38670]]

                    Table 12A--Direct PM[ihel2].[ihel5] MVEB Safety Margin Allocation for NNJ
                                                   [Tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Total
                                                                                reduction    Safety
                                                                      On-Road    from all  margin (8%
                            MPO/Subarea                              inventory   sources,   of total   2025 MVEB
                                                                      for 2025   2007 to   reduction)
                                                                                   2025
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NJTPA..............................................................      1,128      4,766         381      1,509
DVRPC (Mercer County)..............................................         90        358          29        119
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              Table 12B--NOX MVEB Safety Margin Allocation for NNJ
                                                   [Tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Total
                                                                                reduction    Safety
                                                                      On-Road    from all  margin (8%
                            MPO/Subarea                              inventory   sources,   of total   2025 MVEB
                                                                      for 2025   2007 to   reduction)
                                                                                   2025
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NJTPA..............................................................     18,626     85,142       6,811     25,437
DVRPC (Mercer County)..............................................      1,920      7,881         630      2,551
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    Table 12C--Direct PM[ihel2].[ihel5] MVEB Safety Margin Allocation for SNJ
                                                   [Tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Total
                                                                                reduction    Safety
                                                                      On-Road    from all  margin (8%
                            MPO/Subarea                              inventory   sources,   of total   2025 MVEB
                                                                      for 2025   2007 to   reduction)
                                                                                   2025
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DVRPC (Burlington, Camden, and Gloucester Counties)................        278      1,056          85        363
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              Table 12D--NOX MVEB Safety Margin Allocation for SNJ
                                                   [Tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Total
                                                                                reduction    Safety
                                                                      On-Road    from all  margin (8%
                            MPO/Subarea                              inventory   sources,   of total   2025 MVEB
                                                                      for 2025   2007 to   reduction)
                                                                                   2025
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DVRPC (Burlington, Camden, and Gloucester Counties)................      6,095     23,848       1,908      8,003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA is proposing to approve the 2009 and 2025 MVEBs for 
NOX and PM2.5 for NNJ and SNJ because EPA has 
determined that the areas will maintain both the 1997 annual and 2006 
24-hr PM2.5 NAAQS with on-road vehicle emissions capped at 
the levels set by the budgets. EPA's review thus far indicates that the 
budgets meet the adequacy criteria set forth by 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), as 
follows:
    (i) The submitted control strategy implementation plan revision or 
maintenance plan was endorsed by the Governor (or his or her designee) 
and was subject to a State public hearing: The SIP revision was 
submitted to EPA by the Commissioner of the New Jersey Department of 
Environmental Protection, who is the Governor's designee.
    (ii) Before the control strategy implementation plan or maintenance 
plan was submitted to EPA, consultation among Federal, State, and local 
agencies occurred; full implementation plan documentation was provided 
to EPA; and EPA's stated concerns, if any, were addressed: New Jersey 
conducted an interagency consultation process involving EPA and USDOT, 
the New Jersey Department of Transportation and affected MPOs. All 
comments and concerns were addressed prior to the final submittal.
    (iii) The motor vehicle emissions budget(s) is clearly identified 
and precisely quantified: The MVEB was clearly identified and 
quantified and is reiterated here in Tables 11A-11D.
    (iv) The motor vehicle emissions budget(s), when considered 
together with all other emissions sources, is consistent with 
applicable requirements for maintenance: Both the 2009 and 2025 MVEB 
are less than the on-road mobile source inventory for 2007 that was 
shown to be consistent with attainment and maintenance of the 
standards. In addition, the 2009 budgets are for a year in which EPA 
has determined that New Jersey attained the applicable air quality 
standards and are therefore consistent with maintenance of the 
respective standards.
    (v) The motor vehicle emissions budget(s) is consistent with and 
clearly related to the emissions inventory and

[[Page 38671]]

the control measures in the submitted control strategy implementation 
plan revision or maintenance plan: The MVEB were developed from the on-
road mobile source inventories, including all applicable state and 
Federal control measures. Inputs related to inspection and maintenance 
and fuels are consistent with New Jersey's Federally-approved control 
programs.
    (vi) Revisions to previously submitted control strategy 
implementation plans or maintenance plans explain and document any 
changes to previously submitted budgets and control measures; impacts 
on point and area source emissions; any changes to established safety 
margins (see Sec.  93.101 for definition); and reasons for the changes 
(including the basis for any changes related to emission factors or 
estimates of vehicle miles traveled): The submitted maintenance plan 
establishes new 2009 and 2025 budgets to ensure continued maintenance 
of the standards; therefore, this in not applicable.
    Once the budgets are approved or found adequate (whichever is 
completed first), they must be used for future conformity 
determinations.

VIII. What is the status of EPA's adequacy determination for the 
proposed NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for 2009 and 2025 
for Northern and Southern New Jersey?

    When reviewing submitted ``control strategy'' SIPs or maintenance 
plans containing MVEBs, EPA may affirmatively find the MVEB contained 
therein adequate for use in determining transportation conformity. Once 
EPA affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB is adequate for 
transportation conformity purposes, that MVEB must be used by state and 
Federal agencies in determining whether proposed transportation 
projects conform to the SIP 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), and our review of New Jersey's 
submission in the context of these criteria was presented in section 
VII. The process for determining adequacy consists of three basic 
steps: Public notification of a SIP submission, a public comment 
period, and EPA's adequacy determination. This process for determining 
the adequacy of submitted MVEBs for transportation conformity purposes 
was initially outlined in EPA's May 14, 1999, guidance, ``Conformity 
Guidance on Implementation of March 2, 1999, Conformity Court 
Decision.'' EPA adopted regulations to codify the adequacy process 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). Additional information on the 
adequacy process for transportation conformity purposes is available in 
the proposed rule entitled, ``Transportation Conformity Rule 
Amendments: Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Changes,'' 
68 FR 38974, 38984 (June 30, 2003).
    As discussed earlier, New Jersey's maintenance plan submission 
includes NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the NNJ and SNJ 
maintenance areas for 2009 and 2025. EPA reviewed the NOX 
and PM2.5 MVEBs through the adequacy process. The New Jersey 
SIP submission, including the NOX and PM2.5 
MVEBs, was open for public comment on EPA's adequacy Web site on 
September 12, 2012, found at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm. The public comment period closed on October 12, 
2012. EPA did not receive any comments on the adequacy of the MVEBs, 
nor did EPA receive any requests for the SIP submittal.
    EPA intends to make its determination on the adequacy of the 2009 
and 2025 MVEBs for NNJ and SNJ for transportation conformity purposes 
in the near future by completing the adequacy process that was started 
on September 12, 2012. After EPA finds the MVEBs adequate or approves 
them, the new MVEBs for NOX and PM2.5 must be 
used for future transportation conformity determinations.

IX. What action is EPA proposing to take?

    EPA is proposing to approve New Jersey's request for redesignating 
the NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas for the 1997 and 
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS to attainment, because the State has 
demonstrated compliance with the requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) 
for redesignation. EPA has evaluated New Jersey'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 monitoring data 
demonstrate that the NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas 
has attained the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 
and will continue to attain the standard. Final approval of this 
redesignation request would change the designation of the NNJ and SNJ 
PM2.5 nonattainment areas from nonattainment to attainment 
for the 1997 PM2.5 annual and the 2006 PM2.5 24-
hour NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve the maintenance plan for 
the NNJ and SNJ PM2.5 nonattainment areas as a revision to 
the New Jersey SIP. EPA is also proposing to approve the 2007 
NH3, VOC, NOX, direct PM2.5 and 
SO2 emissions inventories as meeting the comprehensive 
emissions inventory requirements of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. 
Additionally, EPA is proposing to approve the 2009 and 2025 motor 
vehicle emissions budgets for PM2.5 and NOX. 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 the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a 
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act 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 Clean Air Act. 
Accordingly, this 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 Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     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

[[Page 38672]]

Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) 
because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with 
the Clean Air Act; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications 
as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in 
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects

 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control.

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

    Dated: June 12, 2013.
Judith A. Enck,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 2013-15147 Filed 6-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P