Browse: Departments Dates Agencies
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Environmental Protection Agency
CFR Citation: 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
EPA ID: [EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0517; FRL-8251-7]
NOTICE: PROPOSED RULES
ACTION: Air quality implementation plans; approval and promulgation; various States; air quality planning purposes; designation of areas:
DOCUMENT ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUBJECT CATEGORY: Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; MI; Redesignation of Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo-Battle Creek, Lansing-East Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Areas to Attainment for Ozone
DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 8, 2007.
DOCUMENT SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to make determinations under the Clean Air Act (CAA) that the nonattainment areas of Grand Rapids (Kent and Ottawa Counties), KalamazooBattle Creek (Calhoun, Kalamazoo, and Van Buren Counties), LansingEast Lansing (Clinton, Eaton, and Ingham Counties), Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County have attained the 8hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). These determinations are based on two threeyear periods of complete, qualityassured ambient air quality monitoring data for the 20022004 seasons and the 20032005 seasons that demonstrate that the 8hour ozone NAAQS have been attained in the areas.
EPA is proposing to approve requests from the State of Michigan to redesignate the Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas to attainment of the 8hour ozone NAAQS. The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) submitted these requests on May 9, 2006 and supplemented them on May 26, 2006 and August 25, 2006. In proposing to approve these requests, EPA is also proposing to approve, as revisions to the Michigan State Implementation Plan (SIP), the State's plans for maintaining the 8hour ozone NAAQS through 2018 in the areas. EPA also finds adequate and is proposing to approve the State's 2018 Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEBs) for the Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo Battle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas.
SUMMARY: Michigan,
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information section is arranged as follows:Table of Contents
I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? II. What Actions Is EPA Proposing To Take?
III. What Is the Background for These Actions?
IV. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation?
V. Why Is EPA Proposing To Take These Actions?
VI. What Is the Effect of These Actions?
VII. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Requests?
i. Attainment Determination and Redesignation
ii. Adequacy of Michigan's Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets VIII. What Actions Is EPA Taking Today?
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? A. Submitting CBI
Do not submit this information to EPA through http://www.regulations.gov
or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you
claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail
to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify
electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that
is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment
that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that
does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for
inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be
disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
B. Tips for Preparing Your Comments
When submitting comments, remember to:
1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
2. Follow directionsThe EPA may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes.
4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used.
5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced.
6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest alternatives.
7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats.
8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified.
II. What Actions Is EPA Proposing To Take?
EPA is proposing to take several related actions. EPA is proposing to make determinations that the Grand Rapids (Kent and Ottawa Counties), KalamazooBattle Creek (Calhoun, Kalamazoo and Van Buren Counties), LansingEast Lansing (Clinton, Eaton, and Ingham Counties), Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County, Michigan nonattainment areas have attained the 8hour ozone standard and that these areas have met the requirements for redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is thus proposing to approve Michigan's requests to change the legal designations of the Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas from nonattainment to attainment for the 8hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve Michigan's maintenance plan SIP revisions for Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County (such approvals being one of the CAA criteria for redesignation to attainment status). The maintenance plans are designed to keep the Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas in attainment of the ozone NAAQS through 2018. Additionally, EPA is announcing its action on the Adequacy Process for the newly established 2018 MVEBs for the Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas. The adequacy comment periods for the 2018 MVEBs began on June 1, 2006, with EPA's posting of the availability of these submittals on EPA's Adequacy Web site (at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/[fxsp0 ]stateresources/[fxsp0]transconf/adequacy.htm). The adequacy comment periods for these MVEBs ended on July 3, 2006. EPA did not receive any requests for these submittals or adverse comments on these submittals during the adequacy comment periods. Please see the Adequacy section of this rulemaking for further explanation on this process. Therefore, we find adequate and are proposing to approve the State's 2018 MVEBs for transportation conformity purposes.
III. What Is the Background for These Actions?
Groundlevel ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather,
emissions of nitrogen oxides (NO
The CAA establishes a process for air quality management through the NAAQS. Before promulgation of the current 8hour standard, the ozone NAAQS was based on a 1hour standard. At the time EPA revoked the 1hour ozone NAAQS, on June 15, 2005, the Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo Battle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas were all designated as attainment under the 1hour ozone NAAQS.
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 standard. On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857), EPA published a final rule designating and classifying areas under the 8 hour ozone NAAQS. These designations and classifications became effective June 15, 2004. The CAA required EPA to designate as nonattainment any area that was violating the 8hour ozone NAAQS based on the three most recent years of air quality data, 20012003.
The CAA contains two sets of provisions, subpart 1 and subpart 2, that
[[Page 70917]]
address planning and control requirements for nonattainment areas.
(Both are found in title I, part D, 42 U.S.C. 75017509a and 7511
7511f, respectively.) Subpart 1 (which EPA refers to as ``basic''
nonattainment) contains general 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 ozone
nonattainment areas are subject only to the provisions of subpart 1.
Other ozone nonattainment areas are subject to the provisions of both
subparts 1 and 2. Under EPA's 8hour ozone implementation rule, (69 FR
23951 (April 30, 2004)), an area was classified under subpart 2 based
on its 8hour ozone design value (i.e., the 3year average annual
fourthhighest daily maximum 8hour average ozone concentration), if it
had a 1hour design value at the time of designation at or above 0.121
ppm (the lowest 1hour design value in Table 1 of subpart 2) (69 FR
23954). All other areas are covered under subpart 1, based upon their
8hour design values (69 FR 23958). The Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle
Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason
County areas were all designated as subpart 1, 8hour ozone
nonattainment areas by EPA on April 30, 2004, (69 FR 23857, 23910
23911) based on air quality monitoring data from 20012003 (69 FR 23860).
40 CFR 50.10 and 40 CFR Part 50, Appendix I provide that the 8hour ozone standard is attained when the 3year average of the annual fourthhighest daily maximum 8hour average ozone concentration is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm, when rounded. The data completeness requirement is met when the average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data is greater than 90%, and no single year has less than 75% data completeness. See 40 CFR Part 50, Appendix I, 2.3(d).
On May 9, 2006, Michigan requested that EPA redesignate the Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas to attainment for the 8hour ozone standard. The redesignation requests included three years of complete, qualityassured data for the period of 2002 through 2004, as well as complete quality assured data for 2005, indicating the 8hour NAAQS for ozone had been attained for all of the areas covered by the request. Under the CAA, nonattainment areas may be redesignated to attainment if sufficient complete, qualityassured data are available for the Administrator to determine that the area has attained the standard, and the area meets the other CAA redesignation requirements in section 107(d)(3)(E).
IV. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation?
The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) allows for redesignation provided that: (1) The Administrator determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) the Administrator has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for the area under section 110(k); (3) the Administrator 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) the Administrator 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:
``Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations'', Memorandum
from William G. Laxton, Director Technical Support Division, 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;
``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone
and CO Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, Acting
Director, Air Quality Management Division, to Air Division Directors, Regions 110, 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. V. Why Is EPA Proposing To Take These Actions?
On May 9, 2006, Michigan requested redesignation of the Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas to attainment for the 8hour ozone standard. Michigan supplemented their submittal on May 26, 2006. EPA believes that the areas have attained the standard and have met the requirements for redesignation set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.
VI. What Is the Effect of These Actions?
Approval of the redesignation requests would change the official
designation of the areas for the 8hour ozone NAAQS found at 40 CFR
part 81. It would also incorporate into the Michigan SIP plans for
maintaining the 8hour ozone NAAQS through 2018. The maintenance plans
include contingency measures to remedy future violations of the 8hour
NAAQS. They also establish MVEBs for the year 2018 of 40.70 tons per
day (tpd) VOC and 97.87 tpd NO
[[Page 70918]]
for the KalamazooBattle Creek area, 28.32 tpd VOC and 53.07 tpd
NO
VII. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Requests?
i. Attainment Determination and Redesignation
EPA is proposing to make determinations that the Grand Rapids,
KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron
County, and Mason County nonattainment areas have attained the 8hour
ozone standard and that the areas have met all other applicable section
107(d)(3)(E) redesignation criteria. The basis for EPA's determinations is as follows:
1. The Areas Have Attained the 8Hour Ozone NAAQS (Section
107(d)(3)(E)(i))
EPA is proposing to make determinations that the Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas have 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 Part 50, Appendix I, based on three complete, consecutive calendar years of qualityassured air quality monitoring data. To attain this standard, the 3year average of the fourthhighest daily maximum 8hour average ozone concentrations measured at each monitor within an area over each year must not exceed 0.08 ppm. Based on the rounding convention described in 40 CFR Part 50, Appendix I, the standard is attained if the design value is 0.084 ppm or below. 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.
MDEQ submitted ozone monitoring data for the 2002 to 2004 ozone
seasons. They also submitted data for the 2005 ozone season. The MDEQ
quality assured the ambient monitoring in accordance with 40 CFR 58.10,
and recorded it in the AIRS database, thus making the data publicly
available. The data meets the completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 50,
Appendix I, which requires a minimum completeness of 75 percent
annually and 90 percent over each three year period. Monitoring data is
presented in Table 1 below. Data completeness information is presented in Table 2 below.
Table 1.Annual 4th High Daily Maximum 8Hour Ozone Concentration and 3Year Averages of 4th High Daily Maximum 8Hour Ozone Concentrations
2002 2003
2002 4th 2003 4th 2004 4th 2005 4th 2004 2005
Area County Monitor high high high high average average
(ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm)
Grand Rapids........................ Kent................... Grand Rapids 260810020 0.087 0.085 0.068 0.083 0.080 0.079
Evans 260810022....... 0.088 0.093 0.072 0.083 0.084 0.083
Ottawa................. Jenison 261390005..... 0.093 0.090 0.069 0.086 0.084 0.082
KalamazooBattle Creek.............. Kalamazoo.............. Kalamazoo 260770008... 0.090 0.085 0.068 0.086 0.081 0.080
LansingEast Lansing................ Clinton................ Rose Lake 260370001... 0.085 0.086 0.070 0.078 0.080 0.078
Ingham................. LansingEast Lansing 26 0.088 0.085 0.068 0.082 0.080 0.078
0650012.
Benzie.............................. Benzie................. Frankfort 260190003... 0.086 0.089 0.075 0.086 0.083 0.083
Huron............................... Huron.................. Harbor Beach 260633006 0.087 0.086 0.068 0.077 0.080 0.077
Mason............................... Mason.................. Scottville 261050007.. 0.089 0.087 0.071 0.085 0.082 0.081
Table 2.Data Completeness in Percent (%)
20022004 20032005
Area County Monitor 2002 2003 2004 2005 average average
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
Grand Rapids........................... Kent...................... Grand Rapids 260810020.. 97 98 98 99 98 98
.......................... Evans 260810022......... 100 100 99 98 100 99
Ottawa.................... Jenison 261390005....... 99 100 98 99 99 99
KalamazooBattle Creek................. Kalamazoo................. Kalamazoo 260770008..... 100 97 100 98 99 99
LansingEast Lansing................... Clinton................... Rose Lake 260370001..... 99 100 100 100 100 100
Ingham.................... LansingEast Lansing 26 100 99 100 98 100 99
0650012.
Benzie................................. Benzie.................... Frankfort 260190003..... 100 100 100 98 100 99
Huron.................................. Huron..................... Harbor Beach 260633006.. 100 97 100 97 99 98
Mason.................................. Mason..................... Scottville 261050007.... 100 100 96 95 99 97
In addition, as discussed below with respect to the maintenance
plans, MDEQ has committed to continue operating an EPA approved
monitoring network in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. In summary, EPA
believes that the data submitted by Michigan provide an adequate
demonstration that the Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, Lansing
East Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas have attained the 8hour ozone NAAQS.
[[Page 70919]]
Furthermore, preliminary monitoring data for the 2006 ozone season show that the areas continue to attain the NAAQS.
2. The Areas Have Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and
Part D; and the Areas Have Fully Approved SIPs Under Section 110(k) (Sections 107(d)(3)(E)(v) and 107(d)(3)(E)(ii))
We have determined that Michigan has met all currently applicable SIP requirements for purposes of redesignation for the Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas under Section 110 of the CAA (general SIP requirements). We have also determined that the Michigan SIP meets all SIP requirements currently applicable for purposes of redesignation under Part D of Title I of the CAA (requirements specific to Subpart 1 nonattainment areas), in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, we have determined that the Michigan SIP is fully approved with respect to all applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation, in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these determinations, we have ascertained what SIP requirements are applicable to the areas for purposes of redesignation, and have determined that the portions of the SIP meeting these requirements are fully approved under section 110(k) of the CAA. As discussed more fully below, SIPs must be fully approved only with respect to currently applicable requirements of the CAA.
a. The Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas have met all applicable requirements under section 110 and part D of the CAA. The September 4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum (see ``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) of the CAA. Under this interpretation, a state and the area it wishes to redesignate must meet the relevant CAA requirements that are due prior to the state's submittal of a complete redesignation request for the area. See also the September 17, 1993 Michael Shapiro memorandum and 60 FR 12459, 1246512466 (March 7, 1995) (redesignation of DetroitAnn Arbor, Michigan to attainment of the 1hour ozone NAAQS). Applicable requirements of the CAA that come due subsequent to the state's submittal of a complete request remain applicable until a redesignation to attainment is approved, but are not required as a prerequisite to redesignation. See 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 the St. Louis/East St. Louis area to attainment of the 1hour ozone NAAQS).
General SIP requirements. Section 110(a) of title I of the CAA contains the general requirements for a SIP. Section 110(a)(2) provides that the implementation plan submitted by a state must have been adopted by the state after reasonable public notice and hearing, and that, among other things, it includes enforceable emission limitations and other control measures, means or techniques necessary to meet the requirements of the CAA; provides for establishment and operation of appropriate devices, methods, systems and procedures necessary to monitor ambient air quality; provides for implementation of a source permit program to regulate the modification and construction of any stationary source within the areas covered by the plan; includes provisions for the implementation of part C, Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and part D, New Source Review (NSR) permit programs; includes criteria for stationary source emission control measures, monitoring, and reporting; includes provisions for air quality modeling; and provides for public and local agency participation in planning and emission control rule development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA requires that SIPs contain 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 (NO
\1\ On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA issued a
NO
As discussed above, we believe that section 110 elements which are not linked to the area's nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation. Because there are no section 110 requirements linked to the part D requirements for 8hour ozone nonattainment areas that have become due, as explained below, there are no Part D requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation under the 8hour standard.
Part D Requirements. EPA has determined that the Michigan SIP meets
applicable SIP requirements under part D of the CAA, since no
requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation became due for
the 8hour ozone standard prior to MDEQ's submission of the
redesignation request for the Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek,
LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas.
[[Page 70920]]
Under part D, an area's classification determines the requirements to
which it will be subject. Subpart 1 of part D, found in sections 172
176 of the CAA, sets forth the basic nonattainment requirements
applicable to all nonattainment areas. Section 182 of the CAA, found in
subpart 2 of part D, establishes additional specific requirements
depending on the area's nonattainment classification. The Grand Rapids,
KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron
County, and Mason County areas were all classified as subpart 1
nonattainment areas, and, therefore, subpart 2 requirements do not apply.
Part D, Subpart 1 applicable SIP requirements. For purposes of evaluating these redesignation requests, the applicable part D, subpart 1 SIP requirements for the Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas are contained in sections 172(c)(1)(9). A thorough discussion of the requirements contained in section 172 can be found in the General Preamble for Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992).
No requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation under part D became due prior to submission of the redesignation request, and, therefore, none are applicable to the areas for purposes of redesignation. Since the State of Michigan has submitted complete ozone redesignation requests for the Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas prior to the deadline for any submissions required for purposes of redesignation, we have determined that these requirements do not apply to the Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas for purposes of redesignation.
Furthermore, EPA has determined that, since PSD requirements will apply after redesignation, 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 NAAQS without part D NSR. A more detailed rationale for this view is described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled, ``Part D New Source Review Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.'' Michigan has demonstrated that the areas to be redesignated will be able to maintain the standard without part D NSR in effect; therefore, EPA concludes that the State need not have a fully approved part D NSR program prior to approval of the redesignation request. The State's PSD program will become effective in the Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas upon redesignation to attainment. See rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60 FR 1246712468, March 7, 1995); ClevelandAkronLorain, Ohio (61 FR 20458, 2046920470, May 7, 1996); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665, October 23, 2001); and Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 3183431837, June 21, 1996).
Section 176 conformity requirements. Section 176(c) of the CAA requires states to establish criteria and procedures to ensure that federallysupported or funded activities, including highway projects, conform to the air quality planning goals in the applicable SIPs. The requirement to determine conformity applies to transportation plans, programs and projects developed, funded or approved under Title 23 of the U.S. Code and the Federal Transit Act (transportation conformity) as well as to all other federallysupported or funded projects (general conformity). State conformity revisions must be consistent with federal conformity regulations relating to consultation, enforcement and enforceability, which EPA promulgated pursuant to CAA requirements.
EPA believes that it is reasonable to interpret the conformity SIP requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating the redesignation request under section 107(d) for two reasons. First, the requirement to submit SIP revisions to comply with the conformity provisions of the CAA continues to apply to areas after redesignation to attainment since such areas would be subject to a section 175A maintenance plan. Second, EPA's federal conformity rules require the performance of conformity analyses in the absence of federallyapproved state rules. Therefore, because areas are subject to the conformity requirements regardless of whether they are redesignated to attainment and, because they must implement conformity under federal rules if state rules are not yet approved, EPA believes it is reasonable to view these requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating a redesignation request. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding this interpretation. See also 60 FR 62748, 6274962750 (Dec. 7, 1995) (Tampa, Florida).
EPA approved Michigan's general and transportation conformity SIPs
on December 18, 1996 (61 FR 66607 and 61 FR 66609, respectively).
Michigan has submitted onhighway motor vehicle budgets of 40.70 tons
per day (tpd) VOC and 97.87 tpd NO
b. The Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing,
Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas have a fully
approved applicable SIP under section 110(k) of the CAA. EPA has fully
approved the Michigan SIP for the Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek,
LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County
areas under section 110(k) of the CAA for all requirements applicable
for purposes of redesignation. EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in
approving a redesignation request (See the September 4, 1992 John
Calcagni memorandum, page 3, Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance
v. Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989990 (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 25413, 25426 (May
12, 2003). Since the passage of the CAA of 1970, Michigan has adopted
and submitted, and EPA has fully approved, provisions addressing the
various required SIP elements applicable to the Grand Rapids,
KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron
County, and Mason County areas under the 1hour ozone standard. No
Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie
County, Huron County, or Mason County area SIP provisions are currently
disapproved, conditionally approved, or partially approved. [[Page 70921]]
3. The Improvement in Air Quality 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. (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii))
EPA finds that Michigan has demonstrated that the observed air quality improvement in the Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the SIP, federal measures, and other stateadopted measures.
In making this demonstration, the State has calculated the change in emissions between 1999 and 2002, one of the years the Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas monitored attainment. The reduction in emissions and the corresponding improvement in air quality over this time period can be attributed to a number of regulatory control measures that Michigan and upwind areas have implemented in recent years. The Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas are all impacted, in varying degrees, by the transport of ozone and ozone precursors from upwind areas. Therefore, local controls as well as controls implemented in upwind counties are relevant to the improvement in air quality in the Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County areas.
a. Permanent and enforceable controls implemented. The following is a discussion of permanent and enforceable measures that have been implemented in the areas:
NOX rules. In compliance with EPA's NO
Federal Emission Control Measures. Reductions in VOC and
NO
Control Measures in Upwind Areas. Upwind ozone nonattainment areas
in the Lake Michigan region, including Chicago, Illinois; Gary,
Indiana; and Milwaukee, Wisconsin have continued to reduce emissions of
VOC and NO
b. Emission reductions. Michigan is using 1999 for the nonattainment inventory and 2002, one of the years used to demonstrate monitored attainment of the NAAQS, for the attainment inventory. MDEQ took emissions estimates, with the exception of the nonroad sector, from EPA's final 1999 and 2002 National Emissions Inventories (NEI). NEI emissions estimates for the nonroad sector were generated using different versions of EPA's NONROAD model for 1999 and 2002. To provide consistency, Michigan estimated nonroad emissions for both 1999 and 2002 using the most current version of EPA's National Mobile Inventory Model (NMIM).
Based on the inventories described above, Michigan's submittal
documents changes in VOC and NO
Table 3.Grand Rapids Area: Total VOC and NOX Emissions for Nonattainment Year 1999 in Tons per Year (tpy)
Kent Ottawa Total
VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX
Point......................................... 4,506 1,134 1,640 37,001 6,146 38,135
Area.......................................... 18,002 3,122 7,279 1,132 25,281 4,254
Nonroad....................................... 5,063 4,938 2,598 2,642 7,661 7,580
Onroad........................................ 12,225 15,939 5,071 7,774 17,296 23,713
Total..................................... 39,796 25,133 16,588 48,549 56,384 73,682
Table 4.Grand Rapids Area: Total VOC and NOX Emissions for Attainment Year 2002 (tpy)
Kent Ottawa Total
VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX
Point......................................... 2,104 769 1,375 17,690 3,479 18,459
Area.......................................... 14,546 2,862 6,896 1,216 21,442 4,078
Nonroad....................................... 4,956 4,932 2,563 2,629 7,519 7,561 [[Page 70922]]
Onroad........................................ 10,392 17,229 3,603 6,079 13,995 23,308
Total..................................... 31,998 25,792 14,437 27,614 46,435 53,406
Table 5.Grand Rapids Area: Comparison of 1999 and 2002 VOC and NOX Emissions (tpy)
VOC NOX
Sector Net change Net change
1999 2002 (19992002) 1999 2002 (19992002)
Point............................... 6,146 3,479 2,667 38,135 18,459 19,676
Area................................ 25,281 21,442 3,839 4,254 4,078 176
Nonroad............................. 7,661 7,519 142 7,580 7,561 19
Onroad.............................. 17,296 13,995 3,301 23,713 23,308 405
Total........................... 56,384 46,435 9,949 73,682 53,406 20,276 Table 6.KalamazooBattle Creek Area: Total VOC and NOX Emissions for Nonattainment Year 1999 (tpy) Calhoun Kalamazoo Van Buren Total VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX Point........................................................... 499 1,036 547 2,202 32 42 1,078 3,280 Area............................................................ 5,077 649 7,709 944 3,699 423 16,485 2,016 Nonroad......................................................... 1,026 982 1,986 1,640 1,105 543 4,117 3,165 Onroad.......................................................... 3,633 5,702 5,410 7,489 1,777 3,582 10,820 16,773
Total....................................................... 10,235 8,369 15,652 12,275 6,613 4,590 32,500 25,234 Table 7.KalamazooBattle Creek Area: Total VOC and NOX Emissions for Attainment Year 2002 (tpy) Calhoun Kalamazoo Van Buren Total VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX Point........................................................... 580 817 470 816 22 36 1,072 1,669 Area............................................................ 3,071 666 8,739 1,033 2,373 303 14,183 2,002 Nonroad......................................................... 1,007 973 1,907 1,620 1,133 535 4,047 3,128 Onroad.......................................................... 3,158 5,560 4,796 7,958 1,583 2,953 9,537 16,471
Total....................................................... 7,816 8,016 15,912 11,427 5,111 3,827 28,839 23,270
Table 8.KalamazooBattle Creek Area: Comparison of 1999 and 2002 VOC and NOX Emissions (tpy)
VOC NOX
Sector Net change Net Change
1999 2002 (19992002) 1999 2002 (19992002)
Point............................... 1,078 1,072 6 3,280 1,669 1,611
Area................................ 16,485 14,183 2,302 2,016 2,002 14
Nonroad............................. 4,117 4,047 70 3,165 3,128 37
Onroad.............................. 10,820 9,537 1,283 16,773 16,471 302
Total........................... 32,500 28,839 3,661 25,234 23,270 1,964
Table 9.LansingEast Lansing Area: Total VOC and NOX Emissions for Nonattainment Year 1999 (tpy)
Clinton Eaton Ingham Total
VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX
Point........................................................... 188 117 99 2,583 1,668 6,133 1,955 8,833
Area............................................................ 2,421 213 3,348 356 6,706 1,293 12,475 1,862
Nonroad......................................................... 879 783 796 876 1,558 1,520 3,233 3,179 [[Page 70923]]
Onroad.......................................................... 1,638 3,035 2,335 3,921 6,218 8,360 10,191 15,316
Total....................................................... 5,126 4,148 6,578 7,736 16,150 17,306 27,854 29,190 Table 10.LansingEast Lansing Area: Total VOC and NOX; Emissions for Attainment Year 2002 (tpy) Clinton Eaton Ingham Total VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX Point........................................................... 197 168 56 1,919 2,092 6,150 2,345 8,237 Area............................................................ 1,645 232 2,205 416 3,879 1,043 7,729 1,691 Nonroad......................................................... 875 755 779 847 1,541 1,509 3,195 3,111 Onroad.......................................................... 1,870 3,432 2,052 3,670 4,678 7,892 8,600 14,994
Total....................................................... 4,587 4,587 5,092 6,852 12,190 16,594 21,869 28,033
Table 11.LansingEast Lansing Area: Comparison of 1999 and 2002 VOC and NOX Emissions (tpy)
VOC NOX
Sector Net change Net change
1999 2002 (19992002) 1999 2002 (19992002)
Point............................... 1,955 2,345 390 8,833 8,237 596
Area................................ 12,475 7,729 4,746 1,862 1,691 171
Nonroad............................. 3,233 3,195 38 3,179 3,111 68
Onroad.............................. 10,191 8,600 1,591 15,316 14,994 322
Total........................... 27,854 21,869 5,985 29,190 28,033 1,157
Table 12.Benzie County Area: Comparison of 1999 and 2002 VOC and NOX Emissions (tpy)
VOC NOX
Sector Net change Net change
1999 2002 (19992002) 1999 2002 (19992002)
Point............................... 3 1 2 4 7 3
Area................................ 1,005 783 222 78 73 5
Nonroad............................. 1,536 1,643 107 186 182 4
Onroad.............................. 314 323 9 595 584 11
Total........................... 2,858 2,750 108 863 846 17
Table 13.Huron County Area: Comparison of 1999 and 2002 VOC and NOX Emissions (tpy)
VOC NOX
Sector Net change Net change
1999 2002 (19992002) 1999 2002 (19992002)
Point............................... 36 76 40 1,282 1,468 186
Area................................ 2,222 1,008 1,214 300 174 126
Nonroad............................. 1,428 1,452 24 1,040 1,018 22
Onroad.............................. 660 509 151 1,245 908 337
Total........................... 4,346 3,045 1,301 3,867 3,568 299 [[Page 70924]]
Table 14.Mason County Area: Comparison of 1999 and 2002 VOC and NOX Emissions (tpy)
VOC NOX
Sector Net change Net change
1999 2002 (19992002) 1999 2002 (19992002)
Point............................... 174 108 66 587 280 307
Area................................ 1551 1021 530 157 147 10
Nonroad............................. 1382 1532 150 288 287 1
Onroad.............................. 536 435 101 895 758 137
Total........................... 3643 3096 547 1927 1472 455
Table 5 shows that the Grand Rapids area reduced VOC emissions by
9,949 tpy and NO
Based on the information summarized above, Michigan has adequately
demonstrated that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable emissions reductions.
4. The Areas Have a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 175a of the CAA. (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv))
In conjunction with its requests to redesignate the Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek, LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County nonattainment areas to attainment status, Michigan submitted SIP revisions to provide for the maintenance of the 8hour ozone NAAQS in these areas through 2018.
a. What is required in a maintenance plan? Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the required 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 ten years after the Administrator approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after the redesignation, the State must submit a revised maintenance plan which demonstrates that attainment will continue to be maintained for ten years following the initial tenyear maintenance period. To address the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must contain contingency measures with a schedule for implementation as EPA deems necessary to assure prompt correction of any future 8hour ozone violations.
The September 4, 1992 John Calcagni memorandum provides additional
guidance on the content of a maintenance plan. The memorandum clarifies
that an ozone maintenance plan should address the following items: the
attainment VOC and NO
b. Attainment Inventory. The MDEQ developed a baseline emissions
inventory for 2002, one of the years MDEQ used to demonstrate monitored
attainment of the 8hour NAAQS, as required by the EPA Consolidated
Emissions Reporting Rule (40 CFR Part 51). MDEQ provided full
documentation of the methodologies it used in its submittal. The
attainment level of emissions is summarized in Tables 15 to 18, below.
Table 15.Grand Rapids Area: Total VOC and NOX Emissions for Attainment Year 2002 (tpd)
Kent Ottawa Total
VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX
Point......................................... 7.67 2.16 4.74 52.08 12.41 54.24
Area.......................................... 28.73 3.61 12.18 1.51 40.91 5.12
Nonroad....................................... 12.42 14.26 5.32 7.96 17.74 22.22
Onroad........................................ 31.13 46.94 10.82 18.00 41.95 64.94
Total..................................... 79.95 66.97 33.06 79.55 113.01 146.52
Table 16.KalamazooBattle Creek Area: Total VOC and NOX Emissions for Attainment Year 2002 (tpd)
Calhoun Kalamazoo Van Buren Total
VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX
Point........................................................... 1.67 2.41 1.58 2.09 0.09 0.17 3.34 4.67
Area............................................................ 7.66 0.75 12.46 1.19 4.16 0.31 24.28 2.25
Nonroad......................................................... 2.62 4.49 4.89 6.97 2.87 1.80 10.38 13.26 [[Page 70925]]
Onroad.......................................................... 9.76 17.83 14.29 22.52 5.17 11.16 29.22 51.51
Total....................................................... 21.71 25.48 33.22 32.77 12.29 13.44 67.22 71.69 Table 17.LansingEast Lansing Area: Total VOC and NOX Emissions for Attainment Year 2002 (tpd) Clinton Eaton Ingham Total VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX Point........................................................... 0.66 0.56 0.21 6.51 7.55 19.14 8.42 26.21 Area............................................................ 3.01 0.24 5.04 0.45 13.69 1.23 21.74 1.92 Nonroad......................................................... 2.24 2.84 1.80 3.30 4.29 6.16 8.33 12.30 Onroad.......................................................... 6.10 11.91 6.48 11.86 13.90 22.96 26.48 46.73
Total....................................................... 12.01 15.55 13.53 22.12 39.43 49.49 64.97 87.16
Table 18.Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County Areas: Total VOC and NOX Emissions for Attainment Year
2002 (tpd)
Benzie Huron Mason
VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX
Point......................................... 0.01 0.03 0.27 6.16 0.39 0.79
Area.......................................... 1.54 0.06 2.18 0.20 1.89 0.16
Nonroad....................................... 4.05 0.61 3.29 5.73 2.88 1.97
Onroad........................................ 1.08 2.10 1.68 3.31 1.39 2.48
Total..................................... 6.68 2.80 7.42 15.40 6.55 5.40
c. Demonstration of Maintenance. Michigan submitted with the
redesignation requests revisions to the 8hour ozone SIP to include 12
year maintenance plans for the Grand Rapids, KalamazooBattle Creek,
LansingEast Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason County
areas, in compliance with section 175A of the CAA. This demonstration
shows maintenance of the 8hour ozone standard by assuring that current
and future emissions of VOC and NO
Michigan is using projected inventories developed by LADCO for the
years 2009 and 2018. The exception to this is the 2018 onroad mobile
source emissions estimates, which were prepared by the Michigan
Department of Transportation. Using projected inventories prepared by
LADCO will ensure that the inventories used for redesignation are
consistent with regional attainment modeling performed in the future.
These emission estimates are presented in Tables 19 to 24 below.
Table 19.Grand Rapids Area: Comparison of 20022018 VOC and NOX Emissions (tpd)
VOC NOX
Sector Net change Net change
2002 2009 2018 (20022018) 2002 2009 2018 (20022018)
Point................................................. 12.41 12.50 15.35 2.94 54.24 21.61 24.39 29.85
Area.................................................. 40.91 41.28 43.98 3.07 5.12 5.37 5.59 0.47
Nonroad............................................... 17.74 12.03 9.95 7.79 22.22 16.57 9.55 12.67
Onroad................................................ 41.95 25.39 13.39 28.56 64.94 44.38 14.38 50.56
Total............................................. 113.01 91.20 82.67 30.34 146.52 87.93 53.91 92.61 [[Page 70926]]
Table 20.KalamazooBattle Creek Area: Comparison of 20022018 VOC and NOX Emissions (tpd)
VOC NOX
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Kathleen D'Agostino, Environmental Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 8861767, dagostino.kathleen@epa.gov.
Common CFR Searches
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 26 CFR Part 301 50 CFR Part 622 39 CFR Part 111 40 CFR Part 300 44 CFR Part 65 50 CFR Part 660 40 CFR Part 271 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 47 CFR Part 64 50 CFR Part 665 49 CFR Part 571 44 CFR Part 64 14 CFR Part 23 47 CFR Part 76 50 CFR Part 229