Browse: Departments Dates Agencies
EPA ID: [EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0485; FRL-8196-7]
SUBJECT CATEGORY: 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
DOCUMENT SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a redesignation request and a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision for the Huntington portion of the HuntingtonAshland, WVKY (herein referred to as the ``Huntington Ashland area'') interstate area from nonattainment to attainment of the 8hour 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 HuntingtonAshland area be redesignated as attainment for the 8 hour ozone NAAQS. The interstate HuntingtonAshland 8hour 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 HuntingtonAshland 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 8hour ozone NAAQS based upon three years of complete, qualityassured ambient air quality ozone monitoring data for 20032005. EPA's proposed approval of the 8hour 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.
SUMMARY: West Virginia,
On May 17, 2006, WVDEP formally submitted a request to redesignate
Huntington from nonattainment to attainment of the 8hour 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 8hour
[[Page 39619]]
ozone nonattainment area. EPA is proposing to determine that Huntington
has attained the 8hour 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 8hour 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 HuntingtonAshland 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 (NO
Groundlevel ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather,
emissions of NO
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8hour ozone standard of 0.08 parts per million (ppm). This new standard is more stringent than the previous 1hour ozone standard. EPA designated, as nonattainment, any area violating the 8hour ozone NAAQS based on the air quality data for the three years of 20012003. These were the most recent three years of data at the time EPA designated 8hour areas. The HuntingtonAshland area was designated as basic 8hour 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 1hour 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 provisionssubpart 1 and subpart 2that 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 pollutantincluding ozonegoverned by a NAAQS. Subpart 2 (which EPA refers to as ``classified'' nonattainment) provides more specific requirements for ozone nonattainment areas. Some 8hour 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 8hour ozone implementation rule, signed on April 15, 2004, an area was classified under subpart 2 based on its 8hour ozone design value (i.e., the 3year average annual fourthhighest daily maximum 8 hour average ozone concentration), if it had a 1hour design value at or above 0.121 ppm (the lowest 1hour design value in the CAA for subpart 2 requirements). All other areas are covered under subpart 1, based upon their 8hour design values. In 2004, the HuntingtonAshland area was designated a basic 8hour ozone nonattainment area based upon air quality monitoring data from 20012003, and is subject to the requirements of subpart 1.
Under 40 CFR part 50, the 8hour ozone standard is attained when the 3year average of the annual fourthhighest daily maximum 8hour 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 3year 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 3year period of 20022004 and a design value of design value of 0.076 ppm for the 3year period of 20032005. The ozone monitoring data from the 3year period of 20032005 indicates that Ashland has a design value of 0.079 ppm. Therefore, the ambient ozone data for the HuntingtonAshland area indicates no violations of the 8 hour ozone standard. Final monitoring data for 2005 indicates continued attainment of the 8hour ozone standard in the HuntingtonAshland area. B. The HuntingtonAshland Area
The HuntingtonAshland area consists of Cabell and Wayne Counties, West Virginia and Boyd County, Kentucky. Prior to its designation as an 8hour ozone nonattainment area, the HuntingtonAshland area was a maintenance area for the 1hour 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 8hour ozone standard. The
redesignation request included 3 years of complete, qualityassured
data for the period of 20022004, indicating that the 8hour NAAQS for
ozone had been achieved in Huntington. The data satisfies the CAA
requirements when the 3year average of the annual fourthhighest daily
maximum 8hour 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, qualityassured data is
available to determine that the area has attained the standard and the
area meets the other CAA redesignation requirements set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E).
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?
The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, allows for redesignation, providing that:
(1) EPA determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS;
(2) EPA has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for the area under section 110(k);
(3) EPA determines that the improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP and applicable Federal air
pollutant control regulations and other permanent and enforceable reductions;
(4) EPA has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area as meeting the requirements of section 175A; and
(5) The State containing such area has met all requirements applicable to the area under section 110 and Part D.
EPA provided guidance on redesignation in the General Preamble for
the Implementation of Title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990, on April
16, 1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented this guidance on April 28,
1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has provided further guidance on processing redesignation requests in the following documents:
On May 17, 2006, the WVDEP requested redesignation of Huntington to attainment for the 8hour 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 1hour 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 1hour 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 8hour ozone NAAQS through 2018, also demonstrates maintenance of the 1hour ozone NAAQS through 2018, even though the latter standard is no longer in effect. Huntington was redesignated to attainment of the 1hour ozone NAAQS on December 21, 1994 (59 FR 45985), and, the initial 1hour ozone maintenance plan provided for maintenance through 2005. Ashland was redesignated to attainment of the 1hour ozone NAAQS on June 29, 1995 (60 FR 33748). Section 51.905(e) of the ``Final Rule To Implement the 8Hour RequirementsPhase 1'' April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23999) specifies the conditions that must be satisfied before EPA may approve a modification to a 1hour maintenance plan which: (1) Removes the obligation to submit a maintenance plan for the 1hour ozone NAAQS eight years after approval of the initial 1hour maintenance plan and/ or (2) removes the obligation to implement contingency measures upon a violation of the 1hour 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 1hour maintenance plan SIP once EPA approves a maintenance plan for the 8hour NAAQS. The maintenance plan will not trigger the contingency plan upon a violation of the 1hour ozone NAAQS, but upon a violation of the 8hour ozone NAAQS. EPA believes that the 8hour standard is now the proper standard which should trigger the contingency plan now that the 1hour NAAQS has been revoked and now that approval of the maintenance plan would allow the State to remove a violation of the 1hour 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 8hour 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 8hour NAAQS (should they occur), and identifies the
MVEBs for NO
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 HuntingtonAshland area has
attained the 8hour 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 HuntingtonAshland Area Has Attained the 8Hour Ozone NAAQS
EPA is proposing to determine that the HuntingtonAshland area has
attained the 8hour ozone NAAQS. For ozone, an area may be considered
to be attaining the 8hour 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 qualityassured
air quality monitoring data. To attain this standard, the 3year average of the fourthhighest daily
[[Page 39621]]
maximum 8hour 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 qualityassured 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 HuntingtonAshland 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 20022005 for the HuntingtonAshland area. This data has
been quality assured and is recorded in AIRS. The fourth high 8hour
daily maximum concentrations, along with the threeyear averages, are summarized in Tables 2 and 3.
Table 2.Huntington's Fourth Highest 8Hour Average Values; Cabell Monitor, AIRS ID 540110006
Annual 4th
Year high reading
(ppm)
2002................................................... 0.097
2003................................................... 0.080
2004................................................... 0.066
2005................................................... 0.082
The average for the 3year period 2002 through 2004 is 0.081 ppm.
The average for the 3year period 2003 through 2005 is 0.076 ppm.
Table 3.Ashland's Fourth Highest 8Hour Average Values; Boyd Monitor, AIRS ID 210190017
Annual 4th
Year high reading
(ppm)
2002................................................... 0.102
2003................................................... 0.088
2004................................................... 0.068
2005................................................... 0.082
The average for the 3year period 2002 through 2004 is 0.086 ppm.
The average for the 3year period 2003 through 2005 is 0.079 ppm.
The air quality data for 20032005 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 HuntingtonAshland area monitors satisfy the CAA
requirement that the 3year average of the annual fourthhighest daily
maximum 8hour 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 HuntingtonAshland area has attained the 8hour ozone NAAQS.
B. The HuntingtonAshland 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 HuntingtonAshland 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, 1246566 (March 7, 1995) (redesignation of DetroitAnn 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).
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:
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 NO
[[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 HuntingtonAshland 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 5317453176
(October 10, 1996), 62 FR 24816 (May 7, 1997); ClevelandAkronLorain,
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 NO
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 8hour 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 8hour 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 8Hour Standard
The HuntingtonAshland area was designated a basic nonattainment area for the 8hour ozone standard. Sections 172176 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 1hour 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 HuntingtonAshland area was classified as a subpart 1 nonattainment area; therefore, no subpart 2 requirements apply to this area.
With respect to the 8hour 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 8hour 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 8hour 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, 438440 (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 SIPapproved PSD
program will become effective in Huntington upon redesignation to
attainment. See rulemakings for Detroit, MI (60 FR 1246712468, March
7, 1995); ClevelandAkronLorrain, OH (61 FR 20458, 2046970, May 7,
1996); Louisville, KY (66 FR 53665, October 23, 2001); Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 3183431837, 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, 98990 (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 HuntingtonAshland area was a
1hour 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 1hour maintenance area, all previous
Part D SIP submittal requirements were fulfilled at the time the area
was redesignated to attainment of the 1hour ozone NAAQS or have been
fulfilled with the submittal of the 8hour maintenance plan for the
area. See rulemakings for Huntington, WV (59 FR 45980 at 4598145982,
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 8hour Part D requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation have yet become due for the HuntingtonAshland area, and therefore they need not be approved into the SIP prior to
redesignation.
4. The Air Quality Improvement in the HuntingtonAshland 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 HuntingtonAshland area is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the SIP, Federal measures, and other Stateadopted
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. (0204).................................................. +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. (0204).................................................. 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
NO
Programs Currently in Effect
(a) National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV);
(b) Motor vehicle fleet turnover with new vehicles meeting the Tier 2 standards; and,
West Virginia has demonstrated that the implementation of permanent enforceable emissions controls have reduced local VOC and
NO
Nearly all of the reductions in NO
NO
NO
Additionally, WVDEP has identified, but not quantified, additional reductions in VOC emissions that will be achieved as a cobenefit 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 nonroad diesel, 69 FR 39858 (June
29, 2004), the heavy duty engine and vehicle standards, 66 FR 5002
(January 18, 2001) and the new Tier 2 tailpipe standards for
automobiles, 65 FR 6698 (January 10, 2000), are also expected to
greatly reduce emissions throughout the country and thereby reduce
emissions impacting the HuntingtonAshland area monitors. The Tier 2
standards came into effect in 2004, and by 2030, EPA expects that the
new Tier 2 standards will reduce NO
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 8hour 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 1hour 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 1hour ozone NAAQS when the State submits and EPA approves an attainment demonstration for the 8hour ozone NAAQS for an area initially designated nonattainment for the 8 hour NAAQS or a maintenance SIP for the 8hour NAAQS for an area initially designated attainment for the 8hour NAAQS. The rationale behind 40 CFR 51.905(e) is to ensure that Huntington maintains the applicable ozone standard (the 8hour 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 8hour ozone NAAQS. Therefore, EPA intends to treat redesignated areas as though they had been initially designated attainment of the 8hour ozone NAAQS, and accordingly proposes to relieve Huntington of its maintenance plan obligations with respect to the 1hour standard. Once approved, the maintenance plan for the 8hour ozone NAAQS will ensure that the SIP for Huntington meets the requirements of the CAA regarding maintenance of the applicable 8hour ozone standard.
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 10year period following the initial 10year 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 8hour 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 InventoryAn 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 3year block of 20022004 and
accounts for reductions attributable to implementation of the CAA requirements to date.
The WVDEP prepared comprehensive VOC and NO
To develop the NO
WVDEP used EPA's Clean Air Markets Division (CAMD) actual data to
calculate 2002 summer daily NO
(ii) Area source emissionsIn 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) Onroad mobile source emissionsVISTAS 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 NO
(iv) Mobile nonroad emissionsThe 2002 mobile nonroad emissions [[Page 39625]]
inventory was developed by WVDEP staff using the NONROAD2005b Model.
The 2004 attainment year VOC and NO
Tables 5 and 6 specify the Huntington VOC and NO
Table 5.Total VOC Emissions for 20042018 (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 20042018 (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
いいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいいい
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.
Additionally, the following mobile programs are either effective or
due to become effective and will further contribute to the maintenance demonstration of the 8hour ozone NAAQS:
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 NO
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 8hour ozone standard should be maintained in Huntington.
(c) Monitoring NetworkThere is currently two monitor measuring
ozone in the HuntingtonAshland 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 AttainmentThe 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 OnRoad
Diesel Engine Rule, and Federal Nonroad Engine/Equipment Rules will
continue to be implemented on a national level. These programs help
provide the reductions necessary for the HuntingtonAshland 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 3year 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 NO
(e) The Maintenance Plan's Contingency MeasuresThe 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 8hour
ozone standard after redesignation depends upon VOC and NO
(i) If the triennial inventories indicate emissions growth in
excess of 10 percent of the 2002 baseyear inventory or if a monitored
air quality exceedance pattern indicates that an ozone NAAQS violation
may be imminentThe 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 EPAapproved 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 baseyear inventory or a monitored air quality exceedance pattern occurs, the following measure will be implemented:
The following schedule for adoption, implementation and compliance
applies to the contingency measures concerning the option of implementing regulatory requirements.
The following schedule for adoption, implementation and compliance applies to the voluntary contingency measures.
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 onroad mobile sources. In the maintenance plan the MVEBs are termed ``onroad 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 8Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Miscellaneous Revisions for Existing Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule AmendmentsResponse 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 onroad 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.
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 8hour 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 onroad, and mobile nonroad sources in 2004
equaled 23.7 tpd of VOC and 37.4 tpd of NO
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 NO
Table 8.2009 and 2018 Final MVEBs for Huntington
VOC emissions NOX emissions
Inventory year (tpd) (tpd)
2009 projected onroad 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 onroad mobile source 2.6 3.6
projected
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Amy Caprio, (215) 814-2156, or by e- mail at caprio.amy@epa.gov.
14 CFR Part 39 40 CFR Part 52 14 CFR Part 71 33 CFR Part 165 50 CFR Part 679 26 CFR Part 1 40 CFR Part 180 47 CFR Part 73 50 CFR Part 17 33 CFR Part 117 44 CFR Part 67 50 CFR Part 648 14 CFR Part 97 33 CFR Part 100 40 CFR Part 63 50 CFR Part 622 26 CFR Part 301 39 CFR Part 111 40 CFR Part 300 50 CFR Part 660 44 CFR Part 65 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 40 CFR Part 271 47 CFR Part 64 50 CFR Part 665 47 CFR Part 76 50 CFR Part 229 14 CFR Part 23 14 CFR Part 25 21 CFR Part 522