Document ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0485-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; West Virginia; Redesignation of the Huntington, WV Portion of the Huntington-Ashland 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area to Attainment and Approval of the Maintenance Plan
Posted Date: 2006-07-13T13:09:21Z

[Federal Register: July 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 134)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 39618-39629]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr13jy06-44]                         

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0485; FRL-8196-7]

 
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
West Virginia; Redesignation of the Huntington, WV Portion of the 
Huntington-Ashland 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area to Attainment and 
Approval of the Maintenance Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a redesignation request and a 
State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision for the Huntington portion of 
the Huntington-Ashland, WV-KY (herein referred to as the ``Huntington-
Ashland area'') interstate area from nonattainment to attainment of the 
8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The West 
Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP) is requesting 
that the Cabell and Wayne County, West Virginia (Huntington) portion of 
the Huntington-Ashland area be redesignated as attainment for the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. The interstate Huntington-Ashland 8-hour ozone 
nonattainment area is comprised of three counties (Cabell and Wayne 
Counties, West Virginia and Boyd County, Kentucky). EPA is proposing to 
approve the ozone redesignation request for the Huntington portion of 
the Huntington-Ashland area. In conjunction with its redesignation 
request, the WVDEP submitted a SIP revision consisting of a maintenance 
plan for Huntington that provides for continued attainment of the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS for the next 12 years. EPA is proposing to make a 
determination that Huntington has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based 
upon three years of complete, quality-assured ambient air quality ozone 
monitoring data for 2003-2005. EPA's proposed approval of the 8-hour 
ozone redesignation request is based on its determination that 
Huntington has met the criteria for redesignation to attainment 
specified in the Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA is providing information on 
the status of its adequacy determination for the motor vehicle emission 
budgets (MVEBs) that are identified in the Huntington maintenance plan 
for purposes of transportation conformity, and is also proposing to 
approve those MVEBs. EPA is proposing approval of the redesignation 
request and of the maintenance plan revision to the West Virginia SIP 
in accordance with the requirements of the CAA.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 14, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2006-0485 by one of the following methods:
    A. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    B. E-mail: morris.makeba@epa.gov.
    C. Mail: EPAR03-OAR-2006-0485, Makeba Morris, Chief, Air Quality 
Planning Branch, D. Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    E. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address. 
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of 
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of 
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2006-0485. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online 
at http://www.epa.gov/edocket 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 
information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through 
http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://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 e-mail comment directly to EPA 
without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address 

will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that 
is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If 
you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your 
name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with 
any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
http://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 http://www.regulations.gov
 or in hard copy during normal business hours at the 

Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 
III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the 
State submittal are available at the West Virginia Department of 
Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street SE, 
Charleston, WV 25304.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Caprio, (215) 814-2156, or by e-
mail at caprio.amy@epa.gov.

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

Table of Contents

I. What Actions Is EPA Proposing To Take?
II. What Is the Background for These Proposed Actions?
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?
IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?
V. What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?
VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the State's Request?
VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and 
Identified in the Huntington Maintenance Plan Adequate and 
Approvable?
VIII. Proposed Action
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

1. What Actions Is EPA Proposing To Take?

    On May 17, 2006, WVDEP formally submitted a request to redesignate 
Huntington from nonattainment to attainment of the 8-hour NAAQS for 
ozone. On May 17, 2006, West Virginia submitted a maintenance plan for 
Huntington as a SIP revision, to ensure continued attainment over the 
next 12 years. Huntington is comprised of Cabell and Wayne Counties. 
Huntington is currently designated as a basic 8-hour

[[Page 39619]]

ozone nonattainment area. EPA is proposing to determine that Huntington 
has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS and that it has met the 
requirements for redesignation pursuant to section 107(d)(3)(E) of the 
CAA. EPA is, therefore, proposing to approve the redesignation request 
to change the designation of Huntington from nonattainment to 
attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve 
the maintenance plan SIP revision for Huntington, such approval being 
one of the CAA requirements for approval of a redesignation request. 
The maintenance plan is designed to ensure continued attainment 
throughout the Huntington-Ashland area for the next 12 years. 
Additionally, EPA is announcing its action on the adequacy process for 
the MVEBs identified in the Huntington maintenance plan, and proposing 
to approve the MVEBs identified for volatile organic compounds (VOC) 
and nitrogen oxides (NOX) for transportation conformity 
purposes. These MVEBs are State MVEBs for the West Virginia portion of 
the Huntington-Ashland 8-hour ozone area. In a separate submittal, the 
Commonwealth of Kentucky is establishing MVEBs for the remainder of 
this area (i.e., Boyd County). Concurrently, the State is requesting 
that EPA approve the maintenance plan as meeting the requirements of 
CAA 175A(b) with respect to the 1-hour ozone maintenance plan update.

II. What Is the Background for These Proposed Actions?

A. General

    Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather, 
emissions of NOX and VOC react in the presence of sunlight 
to form ground-level ozone. The air pollutants NOX and VOC 
are referred to as precursors of ozone. The CAA establishes a process 
for air quality management through the attainment and maintenance of 
the NAAQS.
    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone standard 
of 0.08 parts per million (ppm). This new standard is more stringent 
than the previous 1-hour ozone standard. EPA designated, as 
nonattainment, any area violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the 
air quality data for the three years of 2001-2003. These were the most 
recent three years of data at the time EPA designated 8-hour areas. The 
Huntington-Ashland area was designated as basic 8-hour ozone 
nonattainment status in a Federal Register notice signed on April 25, 
2004 and published on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857). On June 15, 2005 
(69 FR at 23396), the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was revoked in the Huntington-
Ashland area (as well as most other areas of the country). See 40 CFR 
50.9(b); 69 FR at 23396 (April 30, 2004); and see 70 FR 44470 (August 
3, 2005).
    The CAA, Title I, Part D, contains two sets of provisions--subpart 
1 and subpart 2--that address planning and control requirements for 
nonattainment areas. Subpart 1 (which EPA refers to as ``basic'' 
nonattainment) contains general, less prescriptive requirements for 
nonattainment areas for any pollutant--including ozone--governed by a 
NAAQS. Subpart 2 (which EPA refers to as ``classified'' nonattainment) 
provides more specific requirements for ozone nonattainment areas. Some 
8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are subject only to the provisions of 
subpart 1. Other areas are also subject to the provisions of subpart 2. 
Under EPA's 8-hour ozone implementation rule, signed on April 15, 2004, 
an area was classified under subpart 2 based on its 8-hour ozone design 
value (i.e., the 3-year average annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-
hour average ozone concentration), if it had a 1-hour design value at 
or above 0.121 ppm (the lowest 1-hour design value in the CAA for 
subpart 2 requirements). All other areas are covered under subpart 1, 
based upon their 8-hour design values. In 2004, the Huntington-Ashland 
area was designated a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment area based upon 
air quality monitoring data from 2001-2003, and is subject to the 
requirements of subpart 1.
    Under 40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour ozone standard is attained when 
the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour 
average ambient air quality ozone concentrations is less than or equal 
to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when rounding is considered). See 69 FR 
23857 (April 30, 2004) for further information. Ambient air quality 
monitoring data for the 3-year period must meet data completeness 
requirements. The data completeness requirements are met when the 
average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data is greater 
than 90 percent, and no single year has less than 75 percent data 
completeness as determined in Appendix I of 40 CFR part 50. The ozone 
monitoring data indicates that Huntington has a design value of 0.081 
ppm for the 3-year period of 2002-2004 and a design value of design 
value of 0.076 ppm for the 3-year period of 2003-2005. The ozone 
monitoring data from the 3-year period of 2003-2005 indicates that 
Ashland has a design value of 0.079 ppm. Therefore, the ambient ozone 
data for the Huntington-Ashland area indicates no violations of the 8-
hour ozone standard. Final monitoring data for 2005 indicates continued 
attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard in the Huntington-Ashland area.

B. The Huntington-Ashland Area

    The Huntington-Ashland area consists of Cabell and Wayne Counties, 
West Virginia and Boyd County, Kentucky. Prior to its designation as an 
8-hour ozone nonattainment area, the Huntington-Ashland area was a 
maintenance area for the 1-hour ozone nonattainment NAAQS. See 59 FR 
65719 (December 21, 1994).
    On May 17, 2006, the WVDEP requested that Huntington be 
redesignated to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. The 
redesignation request included 3 years of complete, quality-assured 
data for the period of 2002-2004, indicating that the 8-hour NAAQS for 
ozone had been achieved in Huntington. The data satisfies the CAA 
requirements when the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily 
maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration (commonly referred to as the 
area's design value) is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm 
when rounding is considered). Under the CAA, a nonattainment area may 
be redesignated if sufficient complete, quality-assured data is 
available to determine that the area has attained the standard and the 
area meets the other CAA redesignation requirements set forth in 
section 107(d)(3)(E).

III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?

    The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment 
area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, 
allows for redesignation, providing that:
    (1) EPA determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS;
    (2) EPA has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for 
the area under section 110(k);
    (3) EPA determines that the improvement in air quality is due to 
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from 
implementation of the applicable SIP and applicable Federal air 
pollutant control regulations and other permanent and enforceable 
reductions;
    (4) EPA has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area as 
meeting the requirements of section 175A; and
    (5) The State containing such area has met all requirements 
applicable to the area under section 110 and Part D.

[[Page 39620]]

    EPA provided guidance on redesignation in the General Preamble for 
the Implementation of Title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990, on April 
16, 1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented this guidance on April 28, 
1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has provided further guidance on processing 
redesignation requests in the following documents:
     ``Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations'', 
Memorandum from Bill Laxton, June 18, 1990;
     ``Maintenance Plans for Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon 
Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief, 
Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, April 30, 1992;
     ``Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) 
Redesignations,'' Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon 
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 1992;
     ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas 
to Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 
Management Division, September 4, 1992;
     ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in 
Response to Clean Air Act (Act) Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John 
Calcagni Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;
     ``Technical Support Documents (TSD's) for Redesignation 
Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from 
G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17, 
1993;
     ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas 
Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and 
Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) On 
or After November 15, 1992,'' Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, 
Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17, 
1993;
     Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, Acting Director, Air 
Quality Management Division, to Air Division Directors, Regions 1-10, 
``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone and 
CO Nonattainment Areas,'' dated November 30, 1993;
     ``Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for 
Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Memorandum from Mary D. 
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14, 
1994; and
     ``Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration, 
and Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the 
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard,'' Memorandum from John S. 
Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, May 10, 
1995.

IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?

    On May 17, 2006, the WVDEP requested redesignation of Huntington to 
attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. On May 17, 2006, the WVDEP 
submitted a maintenance plan for Huntington as a SIP revision, to 
assure continued attainment over the next 12 years, until 2018. 
Concurrently, West Virginia is requesting that EPA approve the 
maintenance plan as meeting the requirements of CAA 175A(b) with 
respect to the 1-hour ozone maintenance plan update. EPA is proposing 
to approve the maintenance plan to fulfill the requirement of section 
175A(b) for submission of a maintenance plan update eight years after 
Huntington was redesignated to attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. 
EPA believes that such an update must ensure that the maintenance plan 
in the SIP provides maintenance of the NAAQS for a period of 20 years 
after an area is initially redesignated to attainment. EPA can propose 
approval because the maintenance plan, which demonstrates maintenance 
of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS through 2018, also demonstrates maintenance 
of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS through 2018, even though the latter standard 
is no longer in effect. Huntington was redesignated to attainment of 
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS on December 21, 1994 (59 FR 45985), and, the 
initial 1-hour ozone maintenance plan provided for maintenance through 
2005. Ashland was redesignated to attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS 
on June 29, 1995 (60 FR 33748). Section 51.905(e) of the ``Final Rule 
To Implement the 8-Hour Requirements--Phase 1'' April 30, 2004 (69 FR 
23999) specifies the conditions that must be satisfied before EPA may 
approve a modification to a 1-hour maintenance plan which: (1) Removes 
the obligation to submit a maintenance plan for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS 
eight years after approval of the initial 1-hour maintenance plan and/
or (2) removes the obligation to implement contingency measures upon a 
violation of the 1-hour NAAQS. EPA believes that section 51.905(e) of 
the final rule allows a State to make either one or both of these 
modifications to a 1-hour maintenance plan SIP once EPA approves a 
maintenance plan for the 8-hour NAAQS. The maintenance plan will not 
trigger the contingency plan upon a violation of the 1-hour ozone 
NAAQS, but upon a violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA believes 
that the 8-hour standard is now the proper standard which should 
trigger the contingency plan now that the 1-hour NAAQS has been revoked 
and now that approval of the maintenance plan would allow the State to 
remove a violation of the 1-hour NAAQS obligation from the SIP. EPA has 
determined that Huntington has attained the standard and has met the 
requirements for redesignation set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E).

V. What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?

    Approval of the redesignation request would change the designation 
of Huntington from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS found at 40 CFR part 81. It would also incorporate into the West 
Virginia SIP a maintenance plan ensuring continued attainment of the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS in Huntington for the next 12 years, until 2018. The 
maintenance plan includes contingency measures to remedy any future 
violations of the 8-hour NAAQS (should they occur), and identifies the 
MVEBs for NOX and VOC for transportation conformity purposes 
for the years 2004, 2009 and 2018. These MVEBs are displayed in the 
following table:

     Table 1.--Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in Tons per Day (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Year                             NOX      VOC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004..................................................     11.5      6.0
2009..................................................      8.7      4.6
2018..................................................      4.1      3.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the State's Request?

    EPA is proposing to determine that the Huntington-Ashland area has 
attained the 8-hour ozone standard and that all other redesignation 
criteria have been met. The following is a description of how the 
WVDEP's May 17, 2006 submittal satisfies the requirements of section 
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.

A. The Huntington-Ashland Area Has Attained the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS

    EPA is proposing to determine that the Huntington-Ashland area has 
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. For ozone, an area may be considered 
to be attaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS if there are no violations, as 
determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.10 and Appendix I of part 50, 
based on three complete, consecutive calendar years of quality-assured 
air quality monitoring data. To attain this standard, the 3-year 
average of the fourth-highest daily

[[Page 39621]]

maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations measured at each monitor, 
within the area, over each year must not exceed the ozone standard of 
0.08 ppm. Based on the rounding convention described in 40 CFR part 50, 
Appendix I, the standard is attained if the design value is 0.084 ppm 
or below. The data must be collected and quality-assured in accordance 
with 40 CFR part 58, and recorded in the Aerometric Information 
Retrieval System (AIRS). The monitors generally should have remained at 
the same location for the duration of the monitoring period required 
for demonstrating attainment.
    In the Huntington-Ashland area there is one ozone monitor, located 
in Cabell County, West Virginia and one ozone monitor in Boyd County, 
Kentucky that measure air quality with respect to ozone. As part of its 
redesignation request, West Virginia submitted ozone monitoring data 
for the years 2002-2005 for the Huntington-Ashland area. This data has 
been quality assured and is recorded in AIRS. The fourth high 8-hour 
daily maximum concentrations, along with the three-year averages, are 
summarized in Tables 2 and 3.

   Table 2.--Huntington's Fourth Highest 8-Hour Average Values; Cabell
                      Monitor, AIRS ID 54-011-0006
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Annual 4th
                          Year                             high reading
                                                              (ppm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002...................................................            0.097
2003...................................................            0.080
2004...................................................            0.066
2005...................................................            0.082
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The average for the 3-year period 2002 through 2004 is 0.081 ppm.
    The average for the 3-year period 2003 through 2005 is 0.076 ppm.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Table 3.--Ashland's Fourth Highest 8-Hour Average Values; Boyd Monitor,
                           AIRS ID 21-019-0017
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Annual 4th
                          Year                             high reading
                                                              (ppm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002...................................................            0.102
2003...................................................            0.088
2004...................................................            0.068
2005...................................................            0.082
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The average for the 3-year period 2002 through 2004 is 0.086 ppm.
    The average for the 3-year period 2003 through 2005 is 0.079 ppm.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The air quality data for 2003-2005 show that the entire Huntington-
Ashland area has attained the standard with a design value of 0.076 ppm 
for Huntington and a design value of 0.079 ppm for Ashland. The data 
collected at the Huntington-Ashland area monitors satisfy the CAA 
requirement that the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily 
maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration is less than or equal to 
0.08 ppm. The WVDEP's request for redesignation for Huntington 
indicates that the data was quality assured in accordance with 40 CFR 
part 58. The WVDEP uses AIRS as the permanent database to maintain its 
data and quality assures the data transfers and content for accuracy. 
In addition, as discussed below with respect to the maintenance plan, 
WVDEP has committed to continue monitoring in accordance with 40 CFR 
part 58. In summary, EPA has determined that the data submitted by West 
Virginia and data taken from AIRS indicates that the Huntington-Ashland 
area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

B. The Huntington-Ashland Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements 
Under Section 110 and Part D of the CAA and Has a Fully Approved SIP 
Under Section 110(k) of the CAA

    EPA has determined that Huntington has met all SIP requirements 
applicable for purposes of this redesignation under section 110 of the 
CAA (General SIP Requirements) and that it meets all applicable SIP 
requirements under Part D of Title I of the CAA, in accordance with 
section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, EPA has determined that the SIP 
is fully approved with respect to all requirements applicable for 
purposes of redesignation in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). 
In making these proposed determinations, EPA ascertained what 
requirements are applicable to the Huntington-Ashland area, and 
determined that the applicable portions of the SIP meeting these 
requirements are fully approved under section 110(k) of the CAA. We 
note that SIPs must be fully approved only with respect to applicable 
requirements.
    The September 4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum (``Procedures for 
Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' Memorandum 
from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, 
September 4, 1992) describes EPA's interpretation of section 
107(d)(3)(E) with respect to the timing of applicable requirements. 
Under this interpretation, to qualify for redesignation, States 
requesting redesignation to attainment must meet only the relevant CAA 
requirements that came due prior to the submittal of a complete 
redesignation request. See also Michael Shapiro memorandum, September 
17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66 (March 7, 1995) (redesignation of 
Detroit-Ann Arbor). Applicable requirements of the CAA that come due 
subsequent to the area's submittal of a complete redesignation request 
remain applicable until a redesignation is approved, but are not 
required as a prerequisite to redesignation. Section 175A(c) of the 
CAA. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also 68 FR 
25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of St. Louis).
1. Section 110 General SIP Requirements
    Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA delineates the general 
requirements for a SIP, which include enforceable emissions limitations 
and other control measures, means, or techniques, provisions for the 
establishment and operation of appropriate devices necessary to collect 
data on ambient air quality, and programs to enforce the limitations. 
The general SIP elements and requirements set forth in section 
110(a)(2) include, but are not limited to, the following:
     Submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the State 
after reasonable public notice and hearing;
     Provisions for establishment and operation of appropriate 
procedures needed to monitor ambient air quality;
     Implementation of a source permit program; provisions for 
the implementation of Part C requirement (Prevention of Significant 
Deterioration (PSD));
     Provisions for the implementation of Part D requirements 
for New Source Review (NSR) permit programs;
     Provisions for air pollution modeling; and
     Provisions for public and local agency participation in 
planning and emission control rule development.
    Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to 
prevent sources in a State from significantly contributing to air 
quality problems in another State. To implement this provision, EPA has 
required certain States to establish programs to address transport of 
air pollutants in accordance with the NOX SIP Call, October 
27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), amendments to the NOX SIP Call, May 
14, 1999 (64 FR 26298) and March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), and the Clean 
Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25161). However, the 
section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a State are not linked with a 
particular nonattainment area's designation and

[[Page 39622]]

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, we do not believe that these requirements should be construed 
to be applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. In 
addition, EPA believes that the other section 110 elements not 
connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not linked with an 
area's attainment status are not applicable requirements for purposes 
of redesignation. West Virginia and Kentucky will still be subject to 
these requirements after the Huntington-Ashland area is redesignated. 
The section 110 and Part D requirements, which are linked with a 
particular area's designation and classification, are the relevant 
measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. This policy 
is consistent with EPA's existing policy on applicability of conformity 
(i.e., for redesignations) and oxygenated fuels requirement. See 
Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final rulemakings 61 FR 53174-53176 
(October 10, 1996), 62 FR 24816 (May 7, 1997); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, 
Ohio, final rulemaking 61 FR 20458 (May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida, 
final rulemaking 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995). See also the 
discussion on this issue in the Cincinnati redesignation 65 FR 37890 
(June 19, 2000), and in the Pittsburgh redesignation 66 FR 50399 
(October 19, 2001). Similarly, with respect to the NOX SIP 
Call rules, EPA noted in its Phase 1 Final Rule to Implement the 8-hour 
Ozone NAAQS, that the NOX SIP Call rules are not ``an 
`applicable requirement' for purposes of section 110(l) because the 
NOX rules apply regardless of an area's attainment or 
nonattainment status for the 8-hour (or the 1-hour) NAAQS.'' 69 FR 
23951, 23983 (April 30, 2004).
    EPA believes that section 110 elements not linked to the area's 
nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation. 
Any section 110 requirements that are linked to the Part D requirements 
for 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are not yet due, because, as we 
explain later in this notice, no Part D requirements applicable for 
purposes of redesignation under the 8-hour standard became due prior to 
submission of the redesignation request.
    Because the West Virginia and Kentucky SIPs satisfy all of the 
applicable general SIP elements and requirements set forth in section 
110(a)(2), EPA concludes that West Virginia and Kentucky have satisfied 
the criterion of section 107(d)(3)(E) regarding section 110 of the Act.
2. Part D Nonattainment Area Requirements Under the 8-Hour Standard
    The Huntington-Ashland area was designated a basic nonattainment 
area for the 8-hour ozone standard. Sections 172-176 of the CAA, found 
in subpart 1 of Part D, set forth the basic nonattainment requirements 
for all nonattainment areas. As discussed previously, there are no 
outstanding Part D submittals under the 1-hour standard for this area.
    Section 182 of the CAA, found in subpart 2 of Part D, establishes 
additional specific requirements depending on the area's nonattainment 
classification. The Huntington-Ashland area was classified as a subpart 
1 nonattainment area; therefore, no subpart 2 requirements apply to 
this area.
    With respect to the 8-hour standard, EPA proposes to determine that 
the West Virginia and Kentucky SIPs meet all applicable SIP 
requirements under Part D of the CAA, because no 8-hour ozone standard 
Part D requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation became due 
prior to submission of the area's redesignation request. Because the 
State submitted a complete redesignation request for Huntington prior 
to the deadline for any submissions required under the 8-hour standard, 
we have determined that the Part D requirements do not apply to 
Huntington for the purposes of redesignation.
    In addition to the fact that Part D requirements applicable for 
purposes of redesignation did not become due prior to submission of the 
redesignation request, EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the 
general conformity and NSR requirements as not requiring approval prior 
to redesignation.
    With respect to section 176, Conformity Requirements, section 
176(c) of the CAA requires States to establish criteria and procedures 
to ensure that federally supported or funded projects conform to the 
air quality planning goals in the applicable SIP. The requirement to 
determine conformity applies to transportation plans, programs, and 
projects developed, funded or approved under Title 23 U.S.C. and the 
Federal Transit Act (``transportation conformity'') as well as to all 
other federally supported or funded projects (``general conformity''). 
State conformity revisions must be consistent with Federal conformity 
regulations relating to consultation, enforcement and enforceability 
that the CAA required the EPA to promulgate.
    EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity SIP 
requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating the 
redesignation request under section 107(d) since State conformity rules 
are still required after redesignation and Federal conformity rules 
apply where State rules have not been approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 
F.3d 426, 438-440 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding this interpretation. See 
also 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995).
    EPA has also determined that areas being redesignated need not 
comply with the requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to 
redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the 
standard without Part D NSR in effect, because PSD requirements will 
apply after redesignation. The rationale for this view is described in 
a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and 
Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled, ``Part D NSR Requirements 
or Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.'' West Virginia has 
demonstrated that the area will be able to maintain the standard 
without Part D NSR in effect in Huntington, and therefore, West 
Virginia need not have a fully approved Part D NSR program prior to 
approval of the redesignation request. West Virginia's SIP-approved PSD 
program will become effective in Huntington upon redesignation to 
attainment. See rulemakings for Detroit, MI (60 FR 12467-12468, March 
7, 1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorrain, OH (61 FR 20458, 20469-70, May 7, 
1996); Louisville, KY (66 FR 53665, October 23, 2001); Grand Rapids, 
Michigan (61 FR 31834-31837, June 21, 1996).
3. Huntington Has a Fully Approved SIP for the Purposes of 
Redesignation
    EPA has fully approved the West Virginia SIP for the purposes of 
this redesignation. EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a 
redesignation request. Calcagni Memo, p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania 
Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F. 3d 984, 989-90 (6th Cir. 1998), Wall 
v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), plus any additional measures it 
may approve in conjunction with a redesignation action. See 68 FR 25425 
(May 12, 2003) and citations therein. The Huntington-Ashland area was a 
1-hour maintenance area at the time of its designation as a basic 8-
hour ozone nonattainment area on April 30,

[[Page 39623]]

2004. Because Huntington was a 1-hour maintenance area, all previous 
Part D SIP submittal requirements were fulfilled at the time the area 
was redesignated to attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS or have been 
fulfilled with the submittal of the 8-hour maintenance plan for the 
area. See rulemakings for Huntington, WV (59 FR 45980 at 45981-45982, 
September 6, 1994); (59 FR 45019, September 6, 1994); and, (59 FR 
65719, December 21, 1994). Because there are no outstanding SIP 
submission requirements applicable for the purposes of redesignation of 
Huntington, the applicable implementation plan satisfies all pertinent 
SIP requirements. As indicated previously, EPA believes that the 
section 110 elements not connected with Part D nonattainment plan 
submissions and not linked to the area's nonattainment status are not 
applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. EPA also 
believes that no 8-hour Part D requirements applicable for purposes of 
redesignation have yet become due for the Huntington-Ashland area, and 
therefore they need not be approved into the SIP prior to 
redesignation.
4. The Air Quality Improvement in the Huntington-Ashland Area Is Due to 
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions Resulting From 
Implementation of the SIP and Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control 
Regulations and Other Permanent and Enforceable Reductions
    EPA believes that the States have demonstrated that the observed 
air quality improvement in the Huntington-Ashland area is due to 
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from 
implementation of the SIP, Federal measures, and other State-adopted 
measures. Emissions reductions attributable to these rules in 
Huntington are shown in Table 4.

                          Table 4.--Total VOC and NOX Emissions for 2002 and 2004 (tpd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Year                                Point    Area*    Nonroad     Mobile    Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 2002......................................................      1.1     11.7        4.1        6.8     23.7
Year 2004......................................................      1.3     12.1        4.3        6.0     23.7
Diff. (02-04)..................................................     +0.2     +0.4       +0.2       -0.8        0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 2002......................................................     12.4      1.2       14.0       11.4     39.0
Year 2004......................................................      7.4      1.2       17.3       11.5     37.4
Diff. (02-04)..................................................     -5.0        0       +3.3       +.10     -1.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Fire emissions are assumed to remain constant.

    Between 2002 and 2004, VOC emissions stayed the same, and 
NOX emissions were reduced by 1.6 tpd, due to the following 
permanent and enforceable measures implemented or in the process of 
being implemented in Huntington:
Programs Currently in Effect
    (a) National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV);
    (b) Motor vehicle fleet turnover with new vehicles meeting the Tier 
2 standards; and,
    (c) Clean Diesel Program.
    West Virginia has demonstrated that the implementation of permanent 
enforceable emissions controls have reduced local VOC and 
NOX emissions. All of the reductions in VOC are attributable 
to mobile and nonroad source emission controls such as federally 
mandated Tier 2 Vehicle and Gasoline Sulfur Program and the Clean 
Diesel Program.
    Nearly all of the reductions in NOX are attributable to 
the implementation of the NOX SIP Call. West Virginia has 
indicated in its submittal that the implementation of the 
NOX SIP Call, with its mandatory reductions in 
NOX emissions from Electric Generating Units (EGUs) and 
large industrial boilers (non-EGUs), reduced NOX emissions 
throughout the Huntington-Ashland area. NOX emissions from 
EGUs in Huntington were reduced by 0.3 tpd between 2002 and 2004. Also, 
NOX emissions from non-EGU sources in Huntington were 
reduced by 4.7 tpd between 2002 and 2004. Reductions in NOX 
emissions from the implementation of the NOX SIP Call from 
EGUs and non-EGUs in counties adjacent to the Huntington (Cabell and 
Wayne Counties), such as Boyd (the other county in the Huntington-
Ashland area) and Lawrence Counties in Kentucky and Putnam County in 
West Virginia have also occurred. The WVDEP believes that the 
improvement in ozone air quality from 2002 to 2004 was the result of 
identifiable, permanent and enforceable reductions in ozone precursor 
emissions for the same period.
    Additionally, WVDEP has identified, but not quantified, additional 
reductions in VOC emissions that will be achieved as a co-benefit of 
the reductions in the emission of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) as a 
result of implementation of EPA's Maximum Achievable Control Technology 
(MACT) standards.
    Other regulations, such as the non-road diesel, 69 FR 39858 (June 
29, 2004), the heavy duty engine and vehicle standards, 66 FR 5002 
(January 18, 2001) and the new Tier 2 tailpipe standards for 
automobiles, 65 FR 6698 (January 10, 2000), are also expected to 
greatly reduce emissions throughout the country and thereby reduce 
emissions impacting the Huntington-Ashland area monitors. The Tier 2 
standards came into effect in 2004, and by 2030, EPA expects that the 
new Tier 2 standards will reduce NOX emissions by about 74 
percent nationally. EPA believes that permanent and enforceable 
emissions reductions are the cause of the long-term improvement in 
ozone levels and are the cause of the Huntington-Ashland area achieving 
attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard.
5. Huntington Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 
175A of the CAA
    In conjunction with its request to redesignate Huntington to 
attainment status, West Virginia submitted a SIP revision to provide 
for maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in Huntington for at least 12 
years after redesignation. West Virginia is requesting that EPA

[[Page 39624]]

approve this SIP revision as meeting the requirement of CAA 175A(b) and 
replace the 1-hour ozone maintenance plan update requirement.
    Under 40 CFR 51.905(e), the EPA may approve a SIP revision 
requesting the removal of the obligation to implement contingency 
measures upon a violation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS when the State 
submits and EPA approves an attainment demonstration for the 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS for an area initially designated nonattainment for the 8-
hour NAAQS or a maintenance SIP for the 8-hour NAAQS for an area 
initially designated attainment for the 8-hour NAAQS. The rationale 
behind 40 CFR 51.905(e) is to ensure that Huntington maintains the 
applicable ozone standard (the 8-hour standard in areas where the 1-
hour standard has been revoked). EPA believes this rationale 
analogously applies to areas that were not initially designated, but 
are redesignated as attainment with the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Therefore, 
EPA intends to treat redesignated areas as though they had been 
initially designated attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and 
accordingly proposes to relieve Huntington of its maintenance plan 
obligations with respect to the 1-hour standard. Once approved, the 
maintenance plan for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS will ensure that the SIP 
for Huntington meets the requirements of the CAA regarding maintenance 
of the applicable 8-hour ozone standard.
What is required in a maintenance plan?
    Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance 
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. 
Under section 175A, the plan must demonstrate continued attainment of 
the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after approval of a 
redesignation of an area to attainment. Eight years after the 
redesignation, the State must submit a revised maintenance plan 
demonstrating that attainment will continue to be maintained for the 
next 10-year period following the initial 10-year period (12 years in 
Huntington's case). To address the possibility of future NAAQS 
violations, the maintenance plan must contain such contingency 
measures, with a schedule for implementation, as EPA deems necessary to 
assure prompt correction of any future 8-hour ozone violations. Section 
175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance plan for areas 
seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. The Calcagni 
memorandum dated September 4, 1992, provides additional guidance on the 
content of a maintenance plan. An ozone maintenance plan should address 
the following provisions:
    (a) An attainment emissions inventory;
    (b) A maintenance demonstration;
    (c) A monitoring network;
    (d) Verification of continued attainment; and
    (e) A contingency plan.
Analysis of the Huntington Maintenance Plan
    (a) Attainment Inventory--An attainment inventory includes the 
emissions during the time period associated with the monitoring data 
showing attainment. An attainment year of 2004 was used for Huntington 
since it is a reasonable year within the 3-year block of 2002-2004 and 
accounts for reductions attributable to implementation of the CAA 
requirements to date.
    The WVDEP prepared comprehensive VOC and NOX emissions 
inventories for Huntington, including point, area, mobile on-road, and 
mobile non-road sources for a base year of 2002.
    To develop the NOX and VOC base year emissions 
inventories, WVDEP used the following approaches and sources of data:
    (i) Point source emissions--West Virginia maintains its point 
source emissions inventory data on the i-STEPS database, which is 
commercial software purchased from a vendor, Pacific Environmental 
Services. Facilities subject to emissions inventory reporting 
requirements were those operating point sources subject to Title V 
permitting requirements. Affected sources were identified from the 
WVDEP's Regulation 30 database which is maintained by the WVDEP's Title 
V Permitting Group. For the 2002 inventory, diskettes were populated 
with i-STEPS software information, as well as source-specific data from 
the previous year and sent to facilities for updates of their 2002 
activity and emissions data. The facilities then sent the diskettes 
back to the State and, where WVDEP staff quality assured the data and 
submitted it to EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX) site as well as to 
contractors for the Visibility Improvement State and Tribal Association 
of the Southeast (VISTAS), a Regional Planning Organization (RPO).
    WVDEP used EPA's Clean Air Markets Division (CAMD) actual data to 
calculate 2002 summer daily NOX emissions from EGUs. To 
calculate summer weekday NOX emissions WVDEP used EPA's CAMD 
data for the date range of June 1, 2002 through August 31, 2002. WVDEP 
staff filtered the resulting NOX data to select West 
Virginia sources (Ceredo and Big Sandy peaking stations). The 
NOX data was downloaded, all weekend days were deleted and 
the remaining emissions were added together, and the total was divided 
by 65. Since, CAMD data does not require VOC emissions reporting, WVDEP 
used VISTAS summer daily VOC emissions values for 2002.
    (ii) Area source emissions--In order to calculate the area source 
emissions inventory the WVDEP took the annual values from the VISTAS 
base year inventory and derived the typical ozone summer weekday, using 
procedures outlined in the EPA's Emissions Modeling Clearinghouse 
(EMCH) Memorandum, ``Temporal Allocation of Annual Emissions Using EMCH 
Temporal Profiles, April 29, 2002.'' This enabled WVDEP to arrive at 
the ``typical'' summer day emissions.
    (iii) On-road mobile source emissions--VISTAS developed 2002 on-
road mobile (highway) emissions inventory data based on vehicle miles 
traveled (VMT) updates provided by WVDEP. VISTAS also estimated future 
emissions based upon expected growth for the future years 2009 and 
2018. However, Federal Transportation Conformity requirements dictate 
that the WVDEP consult with the Metropolitan Planning Organization 
(MPO) responsible for transportation planning in developing SIP 
revisions which may establish motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEB). 
This applies to the maintenance plan submitted by WVDEP on May 17, 
2006. Therefore, the WVDEP has consulted with the Huntington MPO, the 
KYOVA Interstate Planning Commission (KYOVA). The KYOVA provided base 
year and projection emissions data consistent with their most recent 
available Travel Demand Model (TDM) results along with EPA's most 
recent emission factor model, MOBILE6.2. The WVDEP used these data to 
estimate highway emissions and, in consultation with the KYOVA, to 
develop highway emissions budgets for VOC and NOX. The KYOVA 
must evaluate future Long Range Transportation Plans and Transportation 
Improvement Programs to ensure that the associated emissions are equal 
to or less then the final emissions budgets. The budgets are designed 
to facilitate a positive conformity determination while ensuring 
overall maintenance of the 8-hour NAAQS. It should be noted that the 
MVEBs and budgets only represent the Huntington, West Virginia (Cabell 
and Wayne Counties) portion of the nonattainment area.
    (iv) Mobile non-road emissions--The 2002 mobile non-road emissions

[[Page 39625]]

inventory was developed by WVDEP staff using the NONROAD2005b Model.
    The 2004 attainment year VOC and NOX emissions 
Huntington are summarized along with the 2009 and 2018 projected 
emissions for Huntington in tables 5 and 6, which covers the 
demonstration of maintenance for this portion of the area. EPA has 
concluded that West Virginia has adequately derived and documented the 
2004 attainment year VOC and NOX emissions for Huntington.
    (b) Maintenance Demonstration--On May 17, 2006, the WVDEP submitted 
a SIP revision to supplement its May 17, 2006 redesignation request. 
The submittal by WVDEP consists of the maintenance plan as required by 
section 175A of the CAA. The Huntington plan shows maintenance of the 
8-hour ozone NAAQS by demonstrating that current and future emissions 
of VOC and NOX remain at or below the attainment year 2004 
emissions levels throughout Huntington through the year 2018. The 
Huntington maintenance demonstration need not be based on modeling. See 
Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 
537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also 66 FR 53094, 53099-53100 (October 19, 
2001), 68 FR 25430-32 (May 12, 2003).
    Tables 5 and 6 specify the Huntington VOC and NOX 
emissions for 2004, 2009, and 2018. The WVDEP chose 2009 as an interim 
year in the 12-year maintenance demonstration period to demonstrate 
that the VOC and NOX emissions are not projected to increase 
above the 2004 attainment level during the time of the 12-year 
maintenance period.

            Table 5.--Total VOC Emissions for 2004-2018 (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     2004 VOC     2009 VOC     2018 VOC
         Source category            emissions    emissions    emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobile \1\.......................          6.0          4.6          3.0
Nonroad..........................          4.3          3.9          3.2
Area \2\.........................         12.1         11.2         12.4
Point............................          1.3          0.9          1.1
                                  --------------------------------------
    Total \3\....................         23.7         20.6        19.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 2004 emissions are actual; Emission budgets are established for 2009
  and 2018 and include a reallocation from the safety margin.
\2\ Fire emissions are assumed to remain constant.
\3\ Sums may not total exactly due to rounding.

              Table 6.--Total NOX Emissions 2004-2018 (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     2004 NOX
         Source category            emissions     2009 NOX     2018 NOX
                                       \1\       emissions    emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobile \1\.......................         11.5          8.7          4.1
Nonroad..........................         17.3         13.4         12.6
Area \2\.........................          1.2          1.3          1.5
Point............................          7.4          8.1          8.8
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
    Total \3\....................         37.4         31.5        27.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 2004 emissions are actual; Emission budgets are established for 2009
  and 2018 and include a reallocation from the safety margin.
\2\ Fire emissions are assumed to remain constant.
\3\ Sums may not total exactly due to rounding.

    Additionally, the following mobile programs are either effective or 
due to become effective and will further contribute to the maintenance 
demonstration of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS:
     Heavy duty diesel on-road (2004/2007) and low-sulfur on-
road (2006); 66 FR 2001 (January 18, 2001); and
     Non-road emissions standards (2008) and off-road diesel 
fuel (2007/2010); 69 FR 39858 (June 29, 2004).
    In addition to the permanent and enforceable measures, CAIR, 
promulgated May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25161) should have positive impacts on 
West Virginia and Kentucky's air quality. CAIR, which will be 
implemented in the eastern portion of the country in two phases (2009 
and 2015), should reduce long range transport of ozone precursors, 
which will have a beneficial effect on air quality in the Huntington-
Ashland area.
    Currently, West Virginia is in the process of adopting rules to 
address CAIR through State rules 45CSR39, 45CSR40, and 45CSR41, which 
require annual and ozone season NOX reductions from EGUs and 
ozone season NOX reductions from non-EGUs. These rules will 
be submitted to EPA as a SIP revision by September 11, 2006 as required 
in the May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25161) Federal Register publication.
    Based upon the comparison of the projected emissions and the 
attainment year emissions along with the additional measures, EPA 
concludes that WVDEP has successfully demonstrated that the 8-hour 
ozone standard should be maintained in Huntington.
    (c) Monitoring Network--There is currently two monitor measuring 
ozone in the Huntington-Ashland area, one in Cabell County, West 
Virginia and one in Boyd County, Kentucky. West Virginia will continue 
to operate its current air quality monitor (located in Cabell County) 
in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.
    (d) Verification of Continued Attainment--The State of West 
Virginia has the legal authority to implement and enforce specified 
measures necessary to attain and maintain the NAAQS. Additionally, 
Federal programs such as Tier 2/Low Sulfur Gasoline Rule, 2007 On-Road 
Diesel Engine Rule, and Federal Non-road Engine/Equipment Rules will 
continue to be implemented on a national level. These programs help 
provide the reductions necessary for the Huntington-Ashland area to 
maintain attainment.
    In addition to maintaining the key elements of its regulatory 
program, West Virginia requires ambient and source emissions data to 
track attainment and maintenance. The WVDEP proposes to fully update 
its point, area, and mobile emission inventories at 3-year intervals

[[Page 39626]]

as required by the Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) to 
assure that its growth projections relative to emissions in these areas 
are sufficiently accurate to assure ongoing attainment with the NAAQS. 
The WVDEP will review stationary source VOC and NOX 
emissions by review of annual emissions statements and by update of its 
emissions inventories. The area source inventory will be updated using 
the same techniques as the 2002 ozone inventory. However, some source 
categories may be updated using historic activity levels determined 
from Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) data or West Virginia 
University/Regional Research Institute (WVU/RRI) population estimates. 
The mobile source inventory model will be updated by obtaining county-
level VMT from the West Virginia Department of Transportation (WVDOT) 
for the subject year and calculating emissions using the latest 
approved MOBILE model. Alternatively, the motor vehicle emissions may 
be obtained in consultation with the Metropolitan Planning Organization 
(MPO), the KYOVA, using methodology similar to that used for 
Transportation Conformity purposes. The WVDEP shall also continue to 
operate the existing ozone monitoring stations in the areas pursuant to 
40 CFR 58 throughout the maintenance period and submit quality-assured 
ozone data to EPA through the AIRS system.
    (e) The Maintenance Plan's Contingency Measures--The contingency 
plan provisions are designed to promptly correct a violation of the 
NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. Section 175A of the Act requires 
that a maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems 
necessary to ensure that the State will promptly correct a violation of 
the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The maintenance plan should 
identify the events that would ``trigger'' the adoption and 
implementation of a contingency measure(s), the contingency measure(s) 
that would be adopted and implemented, and the schedule indicating the 
time frame by which the State would adopt and implement the measure(s).
    The ability of Huntington to stay in compliance with the 8-hour 
ozone standard after redesignation depends upon VOC and NOX 
emissions in Huntington remaining at or below 2004 levels. The State's 
maintenance plan projects VOC and NOX emissions to decrease 
and stay below 2004 levels through the year 2018. The State's 
maintenance plan lays out two situations where the need to adopt and 
implement a contingency measure to further reduce emissions would be 
triggered. Those situations are as follows:
    (i) If the triennial inventories indicate emissions growth in 
excess of 10 percent of the 2002 base-year inventory or if a monitored 
air quality exceedance pattern indicates that an ozone NAAQS violation 
may be imminent--The maintenance plan states that an exceedance pattern 
would include, but is not limited to, the measurement of three 
exceedances or more occurring at the same monitor during a calendar 
year. The plan also states that comprehensive tracking inventories will 
also be developed every 3 years using current EPA-approved methods to 
assure that its growth projections relative to emissions in Huntington 
are sufficiently accurate to assure ongoing attainment with the NAAQS. 
If the 2002 base-year inventory or a monitored air quality exceedance 
pattern occurs, the following measure will be implemented:
     WVDEP will evaluate existing control measures to ascertain 
if additional regulatory revisions are necessary to maintain the ozone 
standard.
    (ii) In the event that a violation of the 8-hour ozone standard 
occurs at either the Cabell County, West Virginia or the Boyd County, 
Kentucky monitor--The maintenance plan states that in the event that a 
violation of the ozone standard occurs at either the Cabell County, 
West Virginia or the Boyd County, Kentucky ozone monitor, the State of 
West Virginia, in consultation with EPA Region III, will implement one 
or more of the following measures to assure continued attainment:
     Extend the applicability of 45CSR21 (VOC/RACT rule) to 
include source categories previously excluded (e.g., waste water 
treatment facilities);
     Revised new source permitting requirements requiring more 
stringent emissions control technology and/or emissions offsets;
     NOX RACT requirements;
     Regulations to establish plant-wide emissions caps 
(potentially with emissions trading provisions);
     Establish a Public Awareness/Ozone Action Day Program, a 
two pronged program focusing on increasing the public's understanding 
of air quality issues in the region and increasing support for actions 
to improve the air quality, resulting in reduced emissions on days when 
the ozone levels are likely to be high.
     Initiate one or more of the following voluntary local 
control measures:
    (1) Bicycle and Pedestrian Measures--A series of measures designed 
to promote bicycling and walking including both promotional activities 
and enhancing the environment for these activities;
    (2) Reduce Engine Idling--Voluntary programs to restrict heavy duty 
diesel engine idling times for both trucks and school buses;
    (3) Voluntary Partnership with Ground Freight Industry--A voluntary 
program using incentives to encourage the ground freight industry to 
reduce emissions;
    (4) Increase Compliance with Open Burning Restrictions--Increase 
public awareness of the existing open burning restrictions and work 
with communities to increase compliance; and
    (5) School Bus Engine Retrofit Program--Have existing school bus 
engines retrofitted to lower emissions.
    The following schedule for adoption, implementation and compliance 
applies to the contingency measures concerning the option of 
implementing regulatory requirements.
     Confirmation of the monitored violation within 45 days of 
occurrence;
     Measure to be selected within 3 months after verification 
of a monitored ozone standard violation;
     Develop rule within 6 months of selection of measure;
     File rule with state secretary (process takes up to 42 
days);
     Applicable regulation to be fully implemented within 6 
months after adoption.
    The following schedule for adoption, implementation and compliance 
applies to the voluntary contingency measures.
     Confirmation of the monitored violation within 45 days of 
occurrence;
     Measure to be selected within 3 months after verification 
of a monitored ozone standard violation;
     Initiation of program development with local governments 
within Huntington by the start of the following ozone season.
    (f) An Additional Provision of the Maintenance Plan--The State's 
maintenance plan for Huntington has an additional provision. That 
provision states that based on the 2002 inventory data and calculation 
methodology, it is expected that area and mobile source emissions would 
not exhibit substantial increases between consecutive periodic year 
inventories. Therefore, if significant unanticipated emissions growth 
occurs, it is expected that point sources would be the cause. West 
Virginia regulation 45 CSR 29 requires significant point source 
emitters in six counties, including Cabell and Wayne, to submit annual 
emission statements

[[Page 39627]]

which contain emission totals for VOCs and NOX. Any 
significant increases that occur can be identified from these reports 
without waiting for a periodic inventory. This gives West Virginia the 
capability to identify needed regulations by source, source category 
and pollutant and to begin the rule promulgation process, if necessary, 
in an expeditious manner.
    The maintenance plan adequately addresses the five basic components 
of a maintenance plan: attainment inventory, maintenance demonstration, 
monitoring network, verification of continued attainment, and a 
contingency plan. EPA believes that the maintenance plan SIP revision 
submitted by West Virginia for Huntington meets the requirements of 
section 175A of the Act.

VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and Identified 
in the Huntington Maintenance Plan Adequate and Approvable?

A. What Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEBs)?

    Under the CAA, States are required to submit, at various times, 
control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone areas. These 
control strategy SIPs (i.e., RFP SIPs and attainment demonstration 
SIPs) and maintenance plans identify and establish MVEBs for certain 
criteria pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution from 
on-road mobile sources. In the maintenance plan the MVEBs are termed 
``on-road mobile source emissions budgets.'' Pursuant to 40 CFR part 93 
and 51.112, MVEBs must be established in an ozone maintenance plan. An 
MVEB is the portion of the total allowable emissions that is allocated 
to highway and transit vehicle use and emissions. An MVEB serves as a 
ceiling on emissions from an area's planned transportation system. The 
MVEB concept is further explained in the preamble to the November 24, 
1993, transportation conformity rule (58 FR 62188). The preamble also 
describes how to establish and revise the MVEBs in control strategy 
SIPs and maintenance plans.
    Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation projects, such 
as the construction of new highways, must ``conform'' to (i.e., be 
consistent with) the part of the State's air quality plan that 
addresses pollution from cars and trucks. ``Conformity'' to the SIP 
means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality 
violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of 
or reasonable progress towards the national ambient air quality 
standards. If a transportation plan does not ``conform,'' most new 
projects that would expand the capacity of roadways cannot go forward. 
Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth EPA policy, criteria, and 
procedures for demonstrating and assuring conformity of such 
transportation activities to an SIP.
    When reviewing submitted ``control strategy'' SIPs or maintenance 
plans containing MVEBs, EPA must affirmatively find the MVEB budget 
contained therein ``adequate'' for use in determining transportation 
conformity. After EPA affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB is 
adequate for transportation conformity purposes, that MVEB can be used 
by State and Federal agencies in determining whether proposed 
transportation projects ``conform'' to the state implementation plan as 
required by section 176(c) of the CAA. EPA's substantive criteria for 
determining ``adequacy'' of a MVEB are set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). 
EPA's process for determining ``adequacy'' consists of three basic 
steps: Public notification of an SIP submission, a public comment 
period, and EPA's adequacy finding. This process for determining the 
adequacy of submitted SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in EPA's May 14, 
1999 guidance, ``Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2, 
1999, Conformity Court Decision.'' This guidance was finalized in the 
Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for the ``New 8-Hour Ozone 
and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Miscellaneous 
Revisions for Existing Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule 
Amendments--Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Change'' on 
July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). EPA follows this guidance and rulemaking in 
making its adequacy determinations.
    The MVEBs for Huntington are listed in Table 1 of this document for 
the 2004, 2009, and 2018 years and are the projected emissions for the 
on-road mobile sources plus any portion of the safety margin allocated 
to the MVEBs (safety margin allocation for 2009 and 2018 only). These 
emission budgets, when approved by EPA, must be used for transportation 
conformity determinations.

B. What Is a Safety Margin?

    A ``safety margin'' is the difference between the attainment level 
of emissions (from all sources) and the projected level of emissions 
(from all sources) in the maintenance plan. The attainment level of 
emissions is the level of emissions during one of the years in which 
the area met the NAAQS. The following example is for the 2018 safety 
margin: Huntington first attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS during the 
2002 to 2004 time period. The State used 2004 as the year to determine 
attainment levels of emissions for Huntington. The total emissions from 
point, area, mobile on-road, and mobile non-road sources in 2004 
equaled 23.7 tpd of VOC and 37.4 tpd of NOX. The WVDEP 
projected emissions out to the year 2018 and projected a total of 19.7 
tpd of VOC and 27.0 tpd of NOX from all sources in 
Huntington. The safety margin for 2018 would be the difference between 
these amounts, or 4.0 tpd of VOC and 10.4 tpd of NOX. The 
emissions up to the level of the attainment year including the safety 
margins are projected to maintain the area's air quality consistent 
with the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The safety margin is the extra emissions 
reduction below the attainment levels that can be allocated for 
emissions by various sources as long as the total emission levels are 
maintained at or below the attainment levels. Table 7 shows the safety 
margins for the 2009 and 2018 years.

          Table 7.--2009 and 2018 Safety Margins for Huntington
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      VOC         NOX
                 Inventory year                    emissions   emissions
                                                     (tpd)       (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004 Attainment.................................        23.7        37.4
2009 Interim....................................        20.6        31.5
2009 Safety Margin..............................         3.1         5.9
2004 Attainment.................................        23.7        37.4
2018 Final......................................        19.7        27.0
2018 Safety Margin..............................         4.0        10.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The WVDEP allocated 1.1 tpd NOX and 0.6 tpd VOC to the 
2009 interim VOC projected on-road mobile source emissions projection 
and the 2009 interim NOX projected on-road mobile source 
emissions projection to arrive at the 2009 MVEBs. For the 2018 MVEBs 
the WVDEP allocated 0.5 tpd NOX and 0.4 tpd VOC from the 
2018 safety margins to arrive at the 2018 MVEBs. Once allocated to the 
mobile source budgets these portions of the safety margins are no 
longer available, and may no longer be allocated to any other source 
category. Table 8 shows the final 2009 and 2018 MVEBS for Huntington.

[[Page 39628]]

           Table 8.--2009 and 2018 Final MVEBs for Huntington
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         VOC emissions    NOX emissions
            Inventory year                   (tpd)            (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009 projected on-road mobile source                4.0              7.6
 projected emissions..................
2009 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs.              0.6              1.1
2009 MVEBs............................              4.6              8.7
2018 projected on-road mobile source                2.6              3.6
 projected emissions..................
2018 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs.              0.4              0.5
2018 MVEBs............................              3.0              4.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Why Are the MVEBs Approvable?

    The 2009 and 2018 MVEBs for Huntington are approvable because the 
MVEBs for NOX and VOC, including the allocated safety 
margins, continue to maintain the total emissions at or below the 
attainment year inventory levels as required by the transportation 
conformity regulations.

D. What Is the Adequacy and Approval Process for the MVEBs in the 
Huntington Maintenance Plan?

    The MVEBs for the Huntington maintenance plan are being posted to 
EPA's conformity Web site concurrent with this proposal. The public 
comment period will end at the same time as the public comment period 
for this proposed rule. In this case, EPA is concurrently processing 
the action on the maintenance plan and the adequacy process for the 
MVEBs contained therein. In this proposed rule, EPA is proposing to 
find the MVEBs adequate and also proposing to approve the MVEBs as part 
of the maintenance plan. The MVEBs cannot be used for transportation 
conformity until the maintenance plan update and associated MVEBs are 
approved in a final Federal Register notice, or EPA otherwise finds the 
budgets adequate in a separate action following the comment period.
    If EPA receives adverse written comments with respect to the 
proposed approval of the Huntington MVEBs, or any other aspect of our 
proposed approval of this updated maintenance plan, we will respond to 
the comments on the MVEBs in our final action or proceed with the 
adequacy process as a separate action. Our action on the Huntington 
MVEBs will also be announced on EPA's conformity Web site: http://www.epa.gov/oms/traq
, (once there, click on the ``Conformity'' button, 

then look for ``Adequacy Review of SIP Submissions for Conformity'').

VIII. Proposed Actions

    EPA is proposing to determine that the Huntington-Ashland area has 
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve the 
redesignation of the Huntington portion of the Huntington-Ashland area 
from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA has 
evaluated West Virginia's redesignation request and determined that it 
meets the redesignation criteria set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of 
the CAA. EPA believes that the redesignation request and monitoring 
data demonstrate that the Huntington-Ashland area has attained the 8-
hour ozone standard. The final approval of this redesignation request 
would change the designation of Huntington from nonattainment to 
attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. EPA is also proposing to 
approve the associated maintenance plan for Huntington, submitted on 
May 17, 2006, as a revision to the West Virginia SIP. EPA is proposing 
to approve the maintenance plan for Huntington because it meets the 
requirements of section 175A as described previously in this notice. 
EPA is also proposing to approve the MVEBs submitted by West Virginia 
for Huntington in conjunction with its redesignation request. EPA is 
soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this document. 
These comments will be considered before taking final action.

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and 
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and 
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive 
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)). 
This action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. Redesignation of an area to attainment under 
section 107(d)(3)(e) of the Clean Air Act does not impose any new 
requirements on small entities. Redesignation is an action that affects 
the status of a geographical area and does not impose any new 
regulatory requirements on sources. Redesignation of an area to 
attainment under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act does not 
impose any new requirements on small entities. Redesignation is an 
action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not 
impose any new regulatory requirements on sources. Accordingly, the 
Administrator certifies that this proposed rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule proposes to approve pre-existing requirements under State law 
and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that 
required by State law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). This proposed 
rule also does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more 
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and 
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities 
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by 
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it have 
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between 
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as 
specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), 
because it merely proposes to affect the status of a geographical area, 
does not impose any new requirements on sources, or allow the State to 
avoid adopting or implementing other requirements, and does not alter 
the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities 
established in the Clean Air Act. This proposed rule also is not 
subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because 
it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the

[[Page 39629]]

absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary 
consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP 
submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with 
applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in 
place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of 
the Clean Air Act. Redesignation is an action that affects the status 
of a geographical area and does not impose any new requirements on 
sources. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National 
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do 
not apply. As required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 
4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing this proposed rule, EPA has taken 
the necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, 
minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for 
affected conduct. EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 
8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the takings implications of the rule 
in accordance with the ``Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for 
the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued 
under the executive order. This rule proposing to approve the 
redesignation of the Huntington area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS, the associated maintenance plan, and the MVEBs identified in the 
maintenance plan, does not impose an information collection burden 
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 
3501 et seq.).
    This rule proposing to approve the redesignation of Huntington to 
attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the associated maintenance plan, 
and the MVEBs identified in the maintenance plan, does not impose an 
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Nitrogen oxides, 
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic 
compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

    Air pollution control, National Parks, Wilderness Areas.

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

    Dated: July 6, 2006.
William T. Wisniewski,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
 [FR Doc. E6-11042 Filed 7-12-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P