sign in sign up
<<
Home , September 27

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 187 / Tuesday, 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 59527

* * * * * Publicly available docket materials are a comprehensive and accurate [FR Doc. 2011–24373 Filed 9–26–11; 8:45 am] available either electronically through emissions inventory. Fourth, EPA BILLING CODE 6560–50–P http://www.regulations.gov or in hard proposed to find that, subject to final copy at the Environmental Protection approval of the emissions inventory and Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation the proviso set forth above with respect ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, to EPA’s proposed Transport Rule, AGENCY Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is Indiana meets the requirements for open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., redesignation of the Evansville area to 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 Monday through Friday, excluding attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS [EPA–R05–OAR–2008–0396; FRL–9469–5] Federal holidays. We recommend that under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean you telephone John Summerhays, Air Act. Finally, EPA proposed to Approval and Promulgation of Air Environmental Scientist, at (312) 886– approve the 2015 and 2022 Motor Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana; 6067, before visiting the Region 5 office. Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEBs) for Redesignation of the Evansville Area FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John the Evansville area into the Indiana SIP. to Attainment of the Fine Particulate Summerhays, Environmental Scientist, These proposals were generally Matter Standard Attainment Planning and Maintenance contingent on EPA finalizing a AGENCY: Environmental Protection Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), Transport Rule which, for purposes of Agency (EPA). Environmental Protection Agency, this action, was substantially equivalent ACTION: Final rule. Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, to the Transport Rule that EPA proposed Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6067, on 2, 2010. SUMMARY: On 3, 2008, the Indiana [email protected]. II. What is the background for these Department of Environmental SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This actions? Management (IDEM) submitted a supplementary information section is request for EPA to approve the arranged as follows: The first air quality standards for redesignation of the Evansville, Indiana PM were promulgated on 18, I. What actions did EPA propose? 2.5 nonattainment area to attainment of the II. What is the background for these actions? 1997, at 62 FR 38652. EPA promulgated 1997 annual fine particulate matter III. What comments did EPA receive and an annual standard at a level of 15 (PM2.5) standard. This request also what are EPA’s responses? micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3), included emissions information and IV. How does the CSAPR compare to the based on a three-year average of annual related material to address related State proposed Transport Rule as it affects mean PM2.5 concentrations. In the same Implementation Plan (SIP) Evansville area air quality? rulemaking, EPA promulgated a 24-hour requirements. On 23, 2011, EPA V. What is EPA’s final analysis of Indiana’s standard of 65 mg/m3, based on a three- proposed to approve the SIP submittals request? VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews year average of the 98th percentile of 24- and to act as requested to redesignate hour concentrations. On 17, the Evansville PM2.5 nonattainment area I. What actions did EPA propose? 2006, at 71 FR 61144, EPA retained the to attainment. The submittals included Indiana submitted a request for annual average standard at 15 mg/m3 but emissions inventories, a maintenance redesignation of the Evansville area to revised the 24-hour standard to plan for the Evansville area for the 1997 3 attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 35 mg/m , based again on the three-year annual PM2.5 standard and National Ambient Air Quality Standards average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour accompanying motor vehicle emissions (NAAQS) on , 2008, concentrations. budgets. EPA received one set of supplemented by additional subsequent On 5, 2005, at 70 FR 944, as adverse comments and one set of submittals on various dates including supplemented on , 2005, at 70 supportive comments. After review and submittal of a replacement maintenance FR 19844, EPA designated the consideration of these comments and of plan on , 2011. On , 2011, Evansville area as nonattainment for the the emission reduction mandates of the at 76 FR 29695, EPA published a notice 1997 PM2.5 air quality standards. In that final Cross-State Air Pollution Rule of proposed rulemaking addressing action, EPA defined the Evansville promulgated recently, EPA is taking these submittals. In the May 23 action, nonattainment area to include the final action to approve the requested SIP EPA first referred to EPA’s prior final entirety of Dubois, Vanderburgh, and revisions and to redesignate the determination that the Evansville area Warrick Counties and portions of three Evansville PM2.5 nonattainment area to had attained the 1997 annual PM other counties, specifically including 2.5 attainment for the annual 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS (published 27, 2009, Montgomery Township in Gibson standard. at 74 FR 62243), and proposed to County, Ohio Township in Spencer DATES: This final rule is effective on determine that the area continues to County, and Washington Township in , 2011. attain that standard. Second, EPA Pike County. On , 2009, at ADDRESSES: EPA has established a proposed to approve Indiana’s 1997 74 FR 58688, EPA promulgated docket for this action under Docket ID annual PM2.5 maintenance plan for the designations for the 24-hour standard No. EPA–R05–OAR–2008–0396. All Evansville area as a revision to the set in 2006, designating the Evansville documents in the docket are listed on Indiana SIP, subject to the proviso that area as attaining this standard. In that the http://www.regulations.gov Web EPA promulgate a final Transport Rule action, EPA also clarified the site. Although listed in the index, some requiring power plant emission designations for the NAAQS information is not publicly available, reductions substantially equivalent for promulgated in 1997, stating that the i.e., Confidential Business Information purposes of maintaining the PM2.5 Evansville area remained designated (CBI) or other information whose standard in Evansville to those nonattainment for the 1997 annual disclosure is restricted by statute. proposed in EPA’s Transport Rule PM2.5 standard, but was designated Certain other material, such as proposal. Third, EPA proposed to attainment for the 1997 24-hour copyrighted material, is not placed on approve the 2005 emission inventory in standard. Thus today’s action does not the Internet and will be publicly Indiana’s maintenance plan as satisfying address attainment of either the 1997 or available only in hard copy form. the requirement of section 172(c)(3) for the 2006 24-hour standards.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:17 Sep 26, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\27SER1.SGM 27SER1 wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES 59528 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

In response to legal challenges of the which Evansville’s air quality average PM2.5 standard since 2004 to annual standard promulgated in 2006, improvement were attributable, 2006, and continues to meet that the DC Circuit remanded this standard provided the final Transport Rule was standard. The most recent air quality to EPA for further consideration. See substantially equivalent to the proposed data available for 2011 is consistent American Farm Bureau Federation and rule for purposes of maintaining the with continued attainment. The National Pork Producers Council, et al. PM2.5 air quality standard in the information regarding the 24-hour v. EPA, 559 F.3d 512 (D.C. Cir. 2009). Evansville area. values referred to by the commenter However, given that the 1997 and 2006 Final rulemaking for the Transport does not bear upon nor detract from annual standards are essentially Rule, also known as the Cross-State Air EPA’s determinations regarding the identical, attainment of the 1997 annual Pollution Rule (CSAPR), was published area’s longstanding attainment of the standard would also indicate attainment on , 2011, at 76 FR 48208. The 1997 annual standard. of the remanded 2006 annual standard. discussion below addresses the question Comment: Valley Watch claims that Since the Evansville area is designated of whether CSAPR may be considered to the recent air quality improvement ‘‘is nonattainment only for the annual be substantially equivalent to the more likely due to the fact that overall standard promulgated in 1997, today’s proposed Transport Rule for purposes of energy production in the region has action addresses redesignation to maintaining the standard in the been about 25% lower than previous attainment only for this standard. Evansville area. years due to the deep recession * * * The notice of proposed rulemaking rather than permanent and enforceable III. What comments did EPA receive identifies multiple submittals that emission limits.’’ and what are EPA’s responses? Indiana provided in support of its Response: EPA disagrees with the request for redesignation of the EPA received two sets of comments commenter’s opinion regarding the Evansville area. Given the significance on its proposal to redesignate Evansville cause of the Evansville area’s attainment of sulfates and nitrates in the Evansville to attainment for PM2.5. John Blair, on of the standard. The commenter is area, several of these submittals focused behalf of Valley Watch (‘‘Valley evidently referring to a recession that on the sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen Watch’’), opposed the redesignation, the National Bureau of Economic oxides (NOX) emissions from power and Joanne Alexandrovich, on behalf of Research found to extend from plants and the regulations governing the Vanderburgh County Health 2007 to 2009. However, these emissions. Department (‘‘Vanderburgh County’’), EPA determined that the Evansville area EPA proposed the Clean Air Interstate supported the redesignation. The attained the standard before this period, Rule (CAIR) on , 2004, at 69 following discussion summarizes the as established by air quality data for FR 4566, promulgated CAIR on , comments and provides EPA’s 2004 to 2006 and for 2005 to 2007. As 2005, at 70 FR 25162, and promulgated responses. shown in Table 1 of the notice of associated Federal Implementation Comment: Valley Watch states: proposed rulemaking (see 76 FR 29698, Plans (FIPs) on , 2006, at 71 FR ‘‘Monitors in the region have shown May 23, 2011), data for 2010 indicate 25328, in order to reduce SO2 and NOX levels of PM2.5 to be ‘moderate’ on many that the area continues to attain the emissions and improve air quality in more days than they have been in the standard by a substantial margin, many areas across the eastern part of the range considered ‘good’ by EPA in notwithstanding some economic United States. However, as a result of 2011.’’ recovery. Thus, as set forth in the rulings by the Court of Appeals for the Response: The air quality index that proposal and in today’s action, EPA District of Columbia Circuit, the power is cited by the commenter is designed to continues to believe that the air quality plant emission reductions that have characterize 24-hour average improvement is largely attributable to resulted from the development, concentrations in terms such as ‘‘good’’ substantial reductions in power plant promulgation, and implementation of or ‘‘moderate’’ levels. This index is not emissions. CAIR mandated substantial CAIR, and the associated air quality designed to report the 1997 annual reductions in power plant emissions. improvement that has occurred in the PM2.5 values that are at issue in this These requirements address emissions Evansville area and elsewhere, cannot redesignation, and is in fact a weak through 2011 and EPA has now be considered permanent. indicator of annual average promulgated CSAPR, which requires On , 2010, EPA published its concentrations. Furthermore, the air similar or greater reductions in the proposal of the Transport Rule, to quality index that is the focus of the relevant areas in 2012 and beyond. address interstate transport of emissions comment often relies on reporting from Because the emission reduction with respect to the 1997 ozone and the continuous instruments that, although requirements of CAIR are enforceable 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, to replace capable of providing air quality through the 2011 control period, and CAIR. (See 75 FR 45210.) In that information on a timely basis, may because CSAPR has now been rulemaking action, EPA proposed to provide less reliable air quality promulgated to address the require substantial reductions of SO2 information. For these reasons, and requirements previously addressed by and NOX emissions from electric given the imprecise, non-quantitative CAIR and gets similar or greater generating units (egus) across most of nature of the information cited by the reductions in the relevant areas in 2012 the Eastern United States. Indeed, EPA’s commenter, we conclude that it is not and beyond, EPA has determined that rulemaking notice proposing the pertinent to the determination the emission reductions that led to Evansville redesignation expressed the addressed in this rulemaking—whether attainment in the Evansville area can view that the Transport Rule as the Evansville area is meeting the 1997 now be considered permanent and proposed would require reductions of annual average PM2.5. enforceable and that the requirement of these emissions to levels well below the As we have previously shown, based Clean Air Act section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) levels that led to attainment in the on comprehensive and quality-assured has now been met. Evansville area. On this basis, EPA air monitoring data presented in the Comment: Valley Watch contends that proposed to conclude that EPA’s proposed and final determinations of some of the numerous power plants in promulgation of a final Transport Rule attainment and in the proposed the region near Evansville have indeed would make permanent and enforceable redesignation notice, the Evansville area installed scrubbers for the control of the power plant emission reductions to has been meeting the 1997 annual SO2, ‘‘but those reductions are not

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:17 Sep 26, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\27SER1.SGM 27SER1 wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 59529

required by permanent and enforceable Third, in response to the opinion of the rulemaking that cannot be challenged emission limits. The reductions are Court of Appeals for the District of here. mainly undertaken to satisfy cap and Columbia Circuit, CSAPR trading Comment: Valley Watch reviews trade programs like Clean Air Interstate programs include assurance provisions emission controls by power plants in Rule.’’ Valley Watch asserts, as a result, to ensure that the necessary emission the Evansville area. It claims that one that the sources may choose to purchase reductions occur within each covered plant (Gibson Station) is controlling credits and emit more. state. only about 50 percent of the SO2 Furthermore, Valley Watch notes that Comment: Valley Watch argues that, emissions from three of its five units, ‘‘CAIR was overturned by the DC Court while the Transport Rule ‘‘is supposed and that another plant (Rockport of Appeals’’, and so contends that the to be finalized in a matter of weeks,’’ Station) has no plans to control either reductions that it cause cannot be EPA has encountered delays in several NOX or SO2 emissions until at least considered permanent or enforceable. It of its rulemakings, and EPA may not 2018. also asserts that the ‘‘D.C. Circuit rely on a rule that has not yet been Response: Data available on the Clean already held that CAIR does not require promulgated. Air Markets public data repository show enforceable reductions in any particular Response: EPA stated in its notice of that emissions for all five units at state.’’ proposed rulemaking that it would not Gibson Station declined by well more Response: While EPA views CAIR as publish final rulemaking until the than 50 percent from 2002 to 2010, likely one of the motivations for the Transport Rule was made final. CSAPR adding up to a reduction by over 80 power plant emission reductions that it has now been promulgated. EPA notes percent. The dates when the commenter considers the primary cause for the air that, along with promulgation of expects control of Rockport Station are quality improvement in the Evansville CSAPR, EPA issued a supplemental similar to the dates by which a federal area, EPA is not relying solely on CAIR notice of proposed rulemaking to consent decree requires control, though as the basis for redesignating the include six additional states in the other requirements may result in earlier Evansville area to attainment. As summer season NOX trading program. installation of these controls. However, explained in the notice of proposed (See 76 FR 40662, published , the commenter does not explain the rulemaking, CAIR was ultimately 2011.) EPA is not relying, in this relevance of these comments. remanded to EPA without vacatur. EPA redesignation, on reductions that would The relevant issues for this has now responded to that remand with be achieved if that supplemental rulemaking are whether current the promulgation of CSAPR. CAIR limits proposal is finalized as proposed. emission control levels suffice for the emissions through the end of the 2011 Comment: Valley Watch states that area to attain the standard, whether the control periods, and the new Transport ‘‘EPA has offered no analysis, under air quality improvement leading to Rule limits emissions in 2012 and Clean Air Act 110(l), of what impact this attainment is attributable to permanent beyond. With these regulations, EPA is redesignation would have on and enforceable emission reductions, requiring a level of power plant compliance with the 1997 and 2008 and whether the area is assured of emission control that exceeds the level ozone NAAQS, the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS continuing to attain the standard. of reductions that resulted in attainment and the 2010 1-hour SO2 and NOX Redesignation is not contingent on in the Evansville area. NAAQS.’’ achieving all possible emission controls. Several factors contribute to EPA’s Response: This redesignation does not The emission controls that have expectation that CSAPR will provide relax any existing control requirements, occurred to date have sufficed for the even better air quality in the Evansville nor does it affect any existing control Evansville area to attain the standard, area than has occurred to date. First, requirements. On this basis, EPA EPA finds that the air quality given the mandates under CSAPR, any concludes that this redesignation will improvement may be attributed to a utility that has already spent the not interfere with attainment or permanent and enforceable set of hundreds of millions of dollars to install maintenance of any of these air quality emission reductions, and Indiana has scrubbers will clearly find continued standards. demonstrated that sufficient control effective operation of these scrubbers to Valley Watch attached comments requirements are in place to assure that be far more cost-effective than dated 27, 2008, that it submitted the Evansville area will maintain the disregarding this investment and either to Indiana during the State’s comment standard. spending more hundreds of millions of period on a State proposal to request Comment: Valley Watch states that dollars installing replacement scrubbers redesignation. Since these comments Indiana should not use data from 2004 elsewhere or purchasing credits at a were summarized in Indiana’s to 2006 and should instead wait to price equivalent to spending those submittal, EPA has already considered collect another year of data to see if air hundreds of millions of dollars. In short, them as part of that review process. quality in Evansville is ‘‘clean and any utility in a state covered by CSAPR Nevertheless, since the commenter has healthy.’’ The commenter claims that 13 provisions related to PM2.5 that has resubmitted these comments, EPA will percent of the data is missing in 2006 installed scrubbers is almost certain provide responses to those comments as and 16 percent is missing in 2007, under CSAPR to retain the scrubbers well. ‘‘mostly during periods when high and operate them effectively. Second, Comment: Valley Watch commented levels of fine particles are historically any action by a utility that increases its that the air quality standard of 15 mg/m3 formed.’’ Valley Watch states that, ‘‘if emissions, requiring the purchase of is not protective of community health. our design value was approaching the allowances, thereby necessitates a Response: Comments regarding the level recommended by [the Clean Air corresponding emission reduction by appropriateness or adequacy of the 1997 Science Advisory Committee] of 14 mg/ the utility that sells the allowances. PM2.5 air quality standard are not m3, * * * data missing on days of high Given the regional nature of particulate germane to this rulemaking. At issue levels would not be such an issue.’’ matter, this corresponding emission here is whether the Evansville area Response: EPA has examined and reduction will have an air quality meets the criteria in section 107(d)(3)(E) evaluated quality-assured data for more benefit that will compensate at least in for being redesignated as attaining the than four years beyond 2006 and part for the impact of any emission 1997 annual average PM2.5 air quality concludes that the area continues to increase from Evansville area utilities. standard that was established in a prior attain the standard. As a general matter,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:17 Sep 26, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\27SER1.SGM 27SER1 wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES 59530 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

under 40 CFR part 50 Appendix N, data the Evansville area. Indeed, the attainment. The CAIR emission sets that include at least 75 percent of commenter finds that ‘‘PM2.5 annual reduction requirements limit emissions the scheduled data are deemed design values are highly correlated with through 2011 and EPA has now complete and may be considered to the SO2 and NOX emissions from coal promulgated CSAPR which requires provide an adequate representation of fired EGUs located within 100 km of similar or greater reductions in the 2 PM2.5 concentrations. This topic was Evansville (R coefficients ≈ 0.80).’’ relevant areas in 2012 and beyond. In addressed specifically for the Evansville However, the commenter expresses particular, CSAPR requires reduction of area in EPA’s determination of doubt in the view that CAIR caused these emissions to levels well below the attainment and in the proposed significant emission reductions by 2006, levels that led to attainment of the 1997 redesignation. Furthermore, Valley when the Evansville area came into annual PM2.5 standard in the Evansville Watch provided no analysis in support attainment. The commenter expresses area. of its allegation that the data are the view that the area’s air quality EPA and the commenter agree that the unrepresentative. Data meeting the improvement is attributable to power air quality improvement is attributable quality assurance requirements in EPA’s plant emission reductions resulting to emission reductions that are regulations show that the area has been from the Acid Rain Program. enforceable and now permanently continuously in attainment with the Response: EPA has now promulgated required. The requirements of the Acid 1997 annual average PM2.5 standard CSAPR, which limits emissions in the Rain Program are permanent and since 2006. The design value for the relevant area and will replace CAIR. As enforceable and the requirements of area is now well below 14 mg/m3, so that explained above, CAIR limits emissions CSAPR, which replaces CAIR and Valley Watch’s comment suggests that it through the end of the 2011 control requires equivalent or greater reductions must now concede that differences periods, and CSAPR will limit emission in the relevant areas, are also permanent between actual data capture rates in the in 2012 and beyond. and enforceable. Thus, the emission area and 100 percent data capture may The commenter does well to consider reductions that led to attainment in the be considered insignificant. power plant emissions data for a region Evansville area can be said to be Comment: Valley Watch includes that extends beyond the boundaries of permanent and enforceable emission critical comments questioning the the Evansville nonattainment area. reductions. As noted above, CSAPR, integrity of certain State and local Indeed, EPA’s notice of proposed while not requiring identical reductions officials. redesignation addressed emissions for to CAIR, mandated sufficient reductions Response: The comments do not raise 13 states including Indiana, and EPA in the relevant areas to guarantee that issues relevant to redesignation, and are continues to believe that it is any reductions originally associated not germane to this rulemaking. appropriate to examine pertinent with CAIR that may have been Comment: Vanderburgh County emissions trends in this broad area. The necessary for the Evansville area to comments that it believes the State of trends across this 13-state region are demonstrate attainment are now Indiana has submitted a redesignation similar to those identified by the permanently required. package that ‘‘meets all statutory, commenter in the less broad region. regulatory, and guidance requirements’’ In conjunction with its Transport Rule IV. How does CSAPR compare to the for Evansville to be redesignated to rulemaking, EPA conducted an proposed Transport Rule as it affects attainment. extensive examination of pertinent Evansville area air quality? Response: EPA agrees. emissions data and, because the EPA’s proposal to redesignate the Comment: Vanderburgh County Transport Rule was to replace CAIR, Evansville area to attainment was contends that ‘‘redesignation should not EPA evaluated air quality under a contingent in some respects on the final be contingent on final promulgation of baseline that did not include CAIR. Transport Rule being substantially the [Transport Rule].’’ The commenter EPA’s final Transport Rule analysis, equivalent to the proposed Transport adds that the area was meeting the air which took into account comments Rule with respect to air quality in the quality standard by 2006, and disagrees received on the proposal, projected that Evansville area. For example, EPA with EPA’s statement ‘‘that air quality the Evansville area would attain the stated that it proposed to conclude that monitoring between 2004 and 2006 annual PM2.5 standard in 2012 even in the air quality could be attributed to ‘would reflect the benefits from EPA’s the absence of reductions due solely to permanent and enforceable measures development, proposal, and CAIR and not required by other Federal once EPA promulgated the final promulgation of CAIR.’ ’’ The or state regulations or consent decrees). Transport Rule, provided EPA issued commenter provides emissions data for EPA did not conduct a direct ‘‘final promulgation of a Transport Rule power plants within 100 kilometers of assessment of whether the Evansville that is substantially equivalent to the Evansville and elsewhere in Indiana and area would have attained in 2004 to proposed rule for purposes of Kentucky, to support a claim that 2006 in absence of CAIR, and any maintaining the standard in the attainment cannot be attributed to CAIR. extrapolation from EPA’s 2012 analysis Evansville area’’. EPA included a The emissions data, derived from the is complicated by consideration of other similar proviso in the review of EPA Clean Air Markets Web site from emission controls mandated by 2012 Indiana’s maintenance plan. Therefore, 1995 to 2010, suggest that regional (e.g., by the settlement of enforcement the following discussion compares the power plant emissions of SO2 were cases and the imposition of state final against the proposed Transport relatively constant from 2001 to 2006 mandates) that are independent of CAIR Rule. and only declined significantly and CSAPR that mostly occurred after Table 1 shows the proposed and final thereafter. The commenter believes that Evansville attained the standard. annual NOX and annual SO2 budgets for the emissions data indicate that NOX Furthermore, the motivations for power the 13 states that EPA had proposed to emissions steadily and significantly plant emission reductions are difficult find significantly contribute to or declined from 1998 to 2004 and then to discern. In any case, the interfere with maintenance of the 1997 held relatively steady until declining promulgation of CSAPR makes it no annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the Evansville again starting in 2009. longer necessary to determine what area. EPA ultimately did not conclude The commenter agrees that power originally motivated the power plant that these states significantly contribute plant emissions dominate air quality in emission reductions that yielded to, or interfere with, maintenance of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:17 Sep 26, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\27SER1.SGM 27SER1 wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 59531

these NAAQS in the Evansville area, would attain the standard in 2012. with respect to Evansville area air because it determined that even in the Nonetheless, EPA continues to believe quality. absence of CAIR, the Evansville area that these 13 states are the most relevant

TABLE 1—SO2 AND NOX EMISSION BUDGETS FOR 2012 IN PROPOSED AND FINAL TRANSPORT RULE [tons]

SO2 Budgets Annual NOX Budgets State Proposed TR Proposed TR 2012 Final TR 2012 2012 Final TR 2012

Indiana ...... 400,378 285,424 115,687 109,726 Alabama ...... 161,871 216,033 69,169 72,691 Georgia ...... 233,260 158,527 73,801 62,010 Illinois ...... 208,957 234,889 56,040 47,872 Iowa ...... 94,052 107,085 46,068 38,335 Kentucky ...... 219,549 232,662 74,117 85,086 Michigan ...... 251,337 229,303 64,932 60,193 Missouri ...... 203,689 207,466 57,681 52,374 Ohio ...... 464,964 310,230 97,313 92,703 Pennsylvania ...... 388,612 278,651 113,903 119,986 Tennessee ...... 100,007 148,150 28,362 35,703 West Virginia ...... 205,422 146,174 51,990 59,472 Wisconsin ...... 96,439 79,480 44,846 31,628

Total ...... 3,028,537 2,634,074 893,909 867,779

This comparison supports EPA’s Evansville area as meeting the provided that they meet the criteria of conclusion that the final Transport Rule requirements of section 172(c)(3). the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this requires power plant emission Pursuant to section 175A, EPA is action merely approves state law as reductions that are, for purposes of approving the State’s maintenance plan meeting Federal requirements and does maintaining the PM2.5 standard in as providing for maintenance through not impose additional requirements Evansville, at least substantially 2022. EPA is redesignating the beyond those imposed by state law. For equivalent to those proposed. Evansville area to attainment of the that reason, these actions: 1997 annual PM air quality standard. • Are not a ‘‘significant regulatory V. What is EPA’s final analysis of 2.5 Finally, EPA is establishing action’’ subject to review by the Office Indiana’s request? transportation conformity budgets for of Management and Budget under EPA continues to believe that the the area, specifically budgets for NOX of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, Evansville area meets the criteria of 2,628.35 tons per year in 2015 and , 1993); • Clean Air Act section 107(d)(3)(E) for 1869.84 tons per year in 2022 and Do not impose an information redesignation to attainment for the 1997 budgets for direct emissions of PM2.5 of collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act annual PM2.5 air quality standard. First, 57.05 tons per year in 2015 and 53.83 tons per year in 2022. (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); EPA has determined that the air quality • in the area meets the 1997 annual PM Are certified as not having a 2.5 VI. Statutory and Executive Order standard. Second, with the approval significant economic impact on a Reviews today of a comprehensive emission substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act inventory (in satisfaction of the Under the Clean Air Act, requirement in section 172(c)(3)), EPA (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); redesignation of an area to attainment • Do not contain any unfunded has fully approved the applicable and the accompanying approval of a mandate or significantly or uniquely implementation plan. Third, with the maintenance plan under section affect small governments, as described final promulgation of CSAPR, in 107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act conjunction with the Federal motor status of a geographical area and do not of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); vehicle control program and other impose any additional regulatory • Do not have Federalism emission reductions, EPA believes that requirements on sources beyond those implications as specified in Executive the air quality improvement in the imposed by state law. A redesignation to Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, , Evansville area may be attributed to attainment does not in and of itself 1999); measures that are permanent and create any new requirements, but rather • Are not economically significant enforceable. Fourth, EPA believes that results in the applicability of regulatory actions based on health or Indiana has provided a maintenance requirements contained in the Clean Air safety risks subject to Executive Order plan for the PM2.5 standard through Act for areas that have been 13045 (62 FR 19885, , 1997); 2022 that meets the requirements of redesignated to attainment. Moreover, • Are not significant regulatory section 175A. Fifth, EPA believes that the Administrator is required to approve actions subject to Executive Order Indiana has met all pertinent planning a SIP submission that complies with the 13211 (66 FR 28355, , 2001); requirements for the Evansville area provisions of the Clean Air Act and • Are not subject to requirements of under section 110 and Part D. applicable Federal regulations. Section 12(d) of the National Therefore, EPA is taking several 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Technology Transfer and Advancement actions. EPA is approving Indiana’s Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because PM2.5 emission inventory for the EPA’s role is to approve state choices, application of those requirements would

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:17 Sep 26, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\27SER1.SGM 27SER1 wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES 59532 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; States Court of Appeals for the (v) Approval—The 1997 annual PM2.5 and appropriate circuit by , maintenance plans for the following • Do not provide EPA with the 2011. Filing a petition for areas have been approved: discretionary authority to address, as reconsideration by the Administrator of (1) The Evansville area (Dubois, appropriate, disproportionate human this final rule does not affect the finality Vanderburgh, and Warrick Counties, health or environmental effects, using of this action for the purposes of judicial and portions of Gibson, Pike, and practicable and legally permissible review nor does it extend the time Spencer Counties), as submitted on methods, under Executive Order 12898 within which a petition for judicial April 8, 2011. The maintenance plan (59 FR 7629, 16, 1994). review may be filed, and shall not establishes 2015 motor vehicle emission In addition, this rule does not have postpone the effectiveness of such rule budgets for the Evansville area of tribal implications as specified by or action. This action may not be 2628.35 tons per year for NO and 57.05 Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, X challenged later in proceedings to tons per year for PM , and 2022 motor , 2000), because the SIP is 2.5 enforce its requirements. (See section vehicle emission budgets of 1869.84 not approved to apply in Indian country 307(b)(2).) tons per year for NO and 53.83 tons per located in the state, and EPA notes that X year for PM . it will not impose substantial direct List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 2.5 (2) [Reserved] costs on tribal governments or preempt Environmental protection, Air tribal law. pollution control, Incorporation by (w) Approval—The 1997 annual PM2.5 The Congressional Review Act, 5 reference, Intergovernmental relations, comprehensive emissions inventories U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Particulate matter. for the following areas have been Business Regulatory Enforcement approved: Dated: , 2011. Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides (1) Indiana’s 2005 NOX, directly Susan Hedman, that before a rule may take effect, the emitted PM2.5, and SO2 emissions agency promulgating the rule must Regional Administrator, Region 5. inventory satisfies the emission submit a rule report, which includes a 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: inventory requirements of section copy of the rule, to each House of the 172(c)(3) for the Evansville area. Congress and to the Comptroller General PART 52—[AMENDED] (2) [Reserved] of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and other ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 PART 81—[AMENDED] required information to the U.S. Senate, continues to read as follows: the U.S. House of Representatives, and Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. ■ 3. The authority citation for part 81 the Comptroller General of the United continues to read as follows: States prior to publication of the rule in Subpart P—Indiana the Federal Register. A major rule Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. cannot take effect until 60 days after it ■ 2. Section 52.776 is amended by ■ 4. Section 81.315 is amended by is published in the Federal Register. adding paragraphs (v) and (w) to read as revising the entry for ‘‘Evansville, IN’’ in This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as follows: the table for Indiana PM2.5 (Annual defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). NAAQS) to read as follows: Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean § 52.776 Control strategy: Particulate Air Act, petitions for judicial review of matter. § 81.315 Indiana. this action must be filed in the United * * * * * * * * * *

INDIANA PM2.5 [Annual NAAQS]

Designationa Designated area Date1 Type

******* Evansville, IN ...... 10/27/2011 Attainment. Dubois County. Gibson County (part). Montgomery Township. Pike County (part). Washington Township. Spencer County (part). Ohio Township. Vanderburgh County. Warrick County.

******* a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 1 This date is 90 days after , 2005, unless otherwise noted.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:17 Sep 26, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\27SER1.SGM 27SER1 wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 59533

* * * * * monitoring methods during 2011 and 6207J), Environmental Protection [FR Doc. 2011–24371 Filed 9–26–11; 8:45 am] extending the deadline by which Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., BILLING CODE 6560–50–P owners and operators of facilities can Washington, DC 20460; telephone request use of best available monitoring number: (202) 343–9263; fax number: methods for beyond 2011. (202) 343–2342; e-mail address: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DATES: This final rule is effective on [email protected]. For AGENCY , 2011. technical information and implementation materials, please go to 40 CFR Part 98 ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID the Web site http://www.epa.gov/ [EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0417; FRL–9469–4] No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0417. All climatechange/emissions/subpart/ documents in the docket are listed in w.html. To submit a question, select RIN 2060–AP99 the http://www.regulations.gov index. Rule Help Center, followed by ‘‘Contact Us.’’ Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Although listed in the index, some Gases: Petroleum and Natural Gas information may not be publicly Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition available, e.g., confidential business Systems: Revisions to Best Available to being available in Docket ID No. information (CBI) or other information Monitoring Method Provisions EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0417, following whose disclosure is restricted by statute. the Administrator’s signature, an AGENCY: Environmental Protection Certain other material, such as electronic copy of this final rule will Agency (EPA). copyrighted material, is not placed on also be available through the WWW on ACTION: Final rule. the Internet and is publicly available in EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Reporting hard copy only. Publicly available Program Web site at http:// SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing amendments docket materials are available either www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/ to certain provisions related to the use electronically through http:// ghgrulemaking.html. of best available monitoring methods for www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems the EPA’s Docket Center, EPA/DC, EPA SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated source category of the Greenhouse Gas West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Entities. The Administrator determined Reporting Rule. Specifically, EPA is Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, that this action is subject to the extending the time period during which DC. This Docket Facility is open from provisions of Clean Air Act (CAA) owners and operators of facilities would 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through section 307(d). See CAA section be permitted to use best available Friday, excluding legal holidays. The 307(d)(1)(V) (the provisions of section monitoring methods in 2011, without telephone number for the Public 307(d) apply to ‘‘such other actions as submitting a request to the Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and the Administrator may determine’’). Administrator for approval. EPA is also the telephone number for the Air Docket This final rule affects owners or expanding the list of types of emissions is (202) 566–1742. operators of petroleum and natural gas sources for which owners and operators FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: systems. Regulated categories and are not required to submit a request to Carole Cook, Climate Change Division, entities may include those listed in the Administrator to use best available Office of Atmospheric Programs (MC– Table 1 of this preamble:

TABLE 1—EXAMPLES OF AFFECTED ENTITIES BY CATEGORY

Source category NAICS Examples of affected facilities

Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems 486210 Pipeline transportation of natural gas. 221210 Natural gas distribution facilities. 211 Extractors of crude petroleum and natural gas. 211112 Natural gas liquid extraction facilities.

Table 1 of this preamble is not listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER making this rule effective on September intended to be exhaustive, but rather INFORMATION CONTACT section. 30, 2011. Section 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) provides a guide for readers regarding What is the effective date? The final allows an effective date less than 30 facilities likely to be affected by this rule is effective on September 30, 2011. days after publication ‘‘as otherwise action. Table 1 of this preamble lists the Section 553(d) of the Administrative provided by the agency for good cause types of facilities of which EPA is aware Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. Chapter found and published with the rule.’’ As could be potentially affected by the 5, generally provides that rules may not explained below, EPA finds that there is reporting requirements. Other types of take effect earlier than 30 days after they good cause for this rule to become facilities not listed in the table could are published in the Federal Register. effective on or before September 30, also be affected. To determine whether EPA is issuing this final rule under 2011, even though this will result in an you are affected by this action, you section CAA 307(d)(1), which states: effective date fewer than 30 days from should carefully examine the ‘‘The provisions of section 553 through the date of publication in the Federal applicability criteria found in 40 CFR 557 * * * of Title 5 shall not, except as Register. part 98, subpart W or the relevant expressly provided in this section, The purpose of the 30-day waiting criteria in the sections related to apply to actions to which this period prescribed in 5 U.S.C. 553(d) is petroleum and natural gas systems. If subsection applies.’’ Thus, section to give affected parties a reasonable time you have questions regarding the 553(d) of the APA does not apply to this to adjust their behavior and prepare applicability of this action to a rule. EPA is nevertheless acting before the final rule takes effect. That particular facility, consult the person consistently with the purposes purpose, to provide affected parties a underlying APA section 553(d) in reasonable time to adjust to the rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:17 Sep 26, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\27SER1.SGM 27SER1 wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES