[Federal Register: March 19, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 53)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 13247-13249]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr19mr03-26]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[KY-143-200315; FRL-7469-1]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Kentucky:
Approval of Revisions to Maintenance Plan for Northern Kentucky
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the state
implementation plan (SIP) of the Commonwealth of Kentucky to revise the
motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for the Northern Kentucky
maintenance area for the year 2010. The Northern Kentucky maintenance
area, a subset of the Cincinnati-Hamilton maintenance area, includes
the three Kentucky counties of Boone, Campbell and Kenton. The revision
to the MVEBs is allowable because of an available safety margin for
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOX)
for the Northern Kentucky portion of the maintenance area. The
Commonwealth's submittal also requests to clearly identify that the
Ohio portion and the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati-Hamilton
maintenance area will have subarea MVEBs for the purposes of
implementing transportation conformity. Ohio will make a similar
request for subarea MVEBs for this area in an upcoming revision to the
Cincinnati-Hamilton county maintenance plan. Kentucky has requested
that EPA parallel process this revision because the revision is not yet
state-effective.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before April 18, 2003.
ADDRESSES: All comments should be addressed to: Michele Notarianni;
Regulatory Development Section; Air Planning Branch; Air, Pesticides
and Toxics Management Division; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4; 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. (404/
562-9031 (phone) or notarianni.michele@epa.gov (e-mail))
Copies of documents relative to this action are available at the
following addresses for inspection during normal business hours:
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Air Planning Branch, 61
Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. (Michele Notarianni,
404/562-9031, notarianni.michele@epa.gov)
Commonwealth of Kentucky, Division for Air Quality, 803 Schenkel Lane,
Frankfort, Kentucky 40601-1403. (502/573-3382)
Persons wanting to examine these documents should make an
appointment at least 24 hours before the visiting day and reference
file KY143. (Telephone number: 404/562-9031)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michele Notarianni, Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, Region 4, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 61
Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. (404/562-9031 (phone)
or notarianni.michele@epa.gov (e-mail))
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This section is organized as follows:
I. What is the background for this action?
II. Who is affected by this action?
III. What is transportation conformity?
IV. What is an MVEB?
V. What is a safety margin?
VI. How does this action change implementation of transportation
conformity for the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati-Hamilton
maintenance area?
VII. What is parallel processing?
VIII. Proposed action
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Is the Background for This Action?
The Commonwealth of Kentucky submitted a request on February 6,
2003, to revise the MVEBs for the Northern Kentucky maintenance area
for the year 2010. The Northern Kentucky area (i.e., Boone, Campbell
and Kenton counties), in conjunction with the Cincinnati-Hamilton
County area in Ohio, was designated as a nonattainment area for the 1-
hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) per the Clean
Air Act as amended in 1990. In October 1999, after the area had three
consecutive years of ``clean'' air quality data, the Commonwealth of
Kentucky, through the Kentucky Department of Air Quality (KDAQ),
submitted a redesignation request and a maintenance plan for the
Northern Kentucky area to EPA. On June 19, 2000, EPA redesignated the
Northern Kentucky area to attainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS and
approved the maintenance plan for the Northern Kentucky area (65 FR
37879).
[[Page 13248]]
This maintenance plan established the MVEBs which are currently being
used by the Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana Regional Council of Governments
(OKI) to demonstrate transportation conformity. OKI is the metropolitan
planning organization (MPO) for the Cincinnati-Hamilton County area,
including the three counties identified in this action as the Northern
Kentucky area.
II. Who Is Affected by This Action?
Primarily, the transportation sector represented by OKI will
benefit from this revision. Through the Interagency Consultation Group,
which includes the Kentucky transportation and air quality partners,
OKI identified a need for revised MVEBs for the Northern Kentucky area
to allow for growth in the transportation sector. KDAQ, a partner of
the Interagency Consultation Group, evaluated the potential to revise
the MVEBs for the Northern Kentucky area and prepared this SIP revision
to accommodate OKI's request.
III. What Is Transportation Conformity?
Transportation conformity means that the level of emissions from
the transportation sector (i.e., cars, trucks and buses) must be
consistent with the requirements in the SIP to attain and maintain the
NAAQS. The Clean Air Act, in section 176(c), requires conformity of
transportation plans, programs and projects to a SIP's purpose of
attaining and maintaining the NAAQS. On November 24, 1993, EPA
published a final rule establishing criteria and procedures for
determining if transportation plans, programs and projects funded or
approved under Title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act conform to
the SIP.
The transportation conformity rules require an ozone maintenance
area to compare the actual projected emissions from cars, trucks and
buses on the highway network, to the MVEB established by the
maintenance plan. The Northern Kentucky area has an approved
maintenance plan. EPA's approval of the maintenance plan on June 19,
2000, established the MVEBs for transportation conformity purposes.
IV. What Is an MVEB?
An MVEB is the projected level of controlled emissions from the
transportation sector (mobile sources) that is estimated in the SIP.
The SIP controls emissions through regulations, for example, on fuels
and exhaust levels for cars. The MVEB concept is further explained in
the preamble to the November 24, 1993, transportation conformity rule
(58 FR 62188). The preamble also describes how to establish the MVEB in
the SIP and revise the MVEB. The transportation conformity rule allows
the MVEB to be changed as long as the total level of emissions from all
sources remains below the attainment level of emissions.
V. What Is a Safety Margin?
A ``safety margin'' is the difference between the attainment level
of emissions (from all sources) and the projected level of emissions
(from all sources) in the maintenance plan. The attainment level of
emissions is the level of emissions during one of the years in which
the area met the NAAQS. For example, the Northern Kentucky area
attained the 1-hour ozone NAAQS during the 1996-1998 time period.
Kentucky uses 1996 as the attainment level of emissions for the area.
The emissions from point, area and mobile sources in 1996 equaled 39.71
tons per day (tpd) of VOC for the Northern Kentucky area. KDAQ
projected emissions out to the year 2010 and projected a total of 32.55
tpd of VOC. The safety margin for VOCs is calculated to be the
difference between these amounts or, in this case, 7.16 tpd of VOC for
2010. By this same method, 4.78 tpd (i.e., 66.55 tpd less 61.77 tpd) is
the safety margin for NOX for 2010.
The emissions are projected to maintain the area's air quality
consistent with the NAAQS. The safety margin credit can be allocated to
the transportation sector. The total emission level must stay below the
attainment level to be acceptable. The safety margin is the extra
emissions that can be allocated as long as the total attainment level
of emissions is maintained.
VI. How Does This Action Change Implementation of Transportation
Conformity for the Kentucky Portion of the Cincinnati-Hamilton
Maintenance Area?
In today's action, EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the
2010 MVEBs for the Northern Kentucky maintenance area. The revised
MVEBs are 17.13 tpd for NOX and 7.33 tpd for VOC, and
include an allocation of 2.0 tpd and 1.5 tpd from the available safety
margin for NOX and VOC, respectively, for the Northern
Kentucky maintenance area. The MVEB is being changed from 15.13 tpd for
NOX and 5.83 tpd for VOC. Additionally, this action proposes
to approve the establishment of subarea MVEBs for the Northern Kentucky
maintenance area. Presently, OKI demonstrates conformity for the
Kentucky and Ohio portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton maintenance area
together, although Ohio and Kentucky have separate MVEBs for their
areas in the individual SIPs. OKI is the MPO for both areas so it was
convenient to demonstrate conformity for both areas together. However,
because of a recent mismatch for the budget years for the Ohio and
Kentucky portions of this maintenance area, it will be more convenient
for the MPO to demonstrate conformity for each area separately. The
subarea budget for the Northern Kentucky area is identical to the MVEBs
identified above for the Northern Kentucky area. This action merely
provides formal recognition that the MPO will demonstrate conformity
for the Ohio and Kentucky portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton County
maintenance area separately. The establishment of subarea MVEBs for
this area will minimize the administrative burden for the MPO to
demonstrate conformity for the Northern Kentucky maintenance area.
Without the subarea MVEBs, the MPO would have to analyze an extra year
for each conformity analysis because of a current mismatch for the
budget years for the Ohio and Kentucky portions of this maintenance
area.
VII. What Is Parallel Processing?
Kentucky has requested that EPA parallel process this proposed SIP
revision. Under this procedure, the Regional Office works closely with
the Commonwealth of Kentucky while the Commonwealth is developing new
or revised regulations. The state submits a copy of the proposed
regulation or other revisions to EPA before conducting its public
hearing. EPA reviews this proposed state action, and prepares a notice
of proposed rulemaking. EPA's notice of proposed rulemaking is
published in the Federal Register during the same time frame that the
Commonwealth is holding its public hearing. The Commonwealth and EPA
then provide for concurrent public comment periods on both the state
action and the Federal action. After the Commonwealth submits the
formal SIP revision request (including a response to all public
comments raised during the state's public participation process, and
the approved, amended Maintenance Plan for Northern Kentucky), EPA will
prepare a final rulemaking notice. If the Commonwealth's formal SIP
submittal contains changes which occur after EPA's notice of proposed
rulemaking, such changes must be described in EPA's final rulemaking
action. If the Commonwealth's changes are significant, then EPA must
decide whether it is appropriate to re-propose the state's action.
[[Page 13249]]
VIII. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the Commonwealth's SIP revision because
it meets all of the requirements of section 110 of the Clean Air Act.
Additionally, this SIP revision request meets the applicable
requirements of the Transportation Conformity Rule. The Commonwealth
has identified a VOC and NOX safety margin for 2010, and has
chosen to allocate a portion of this safety margin to the MVEBs. The
1.5 tpd for VOC and the 2.0 tpd for NOX allocated to mobile
sources still allow sufficient growth margin for stationary sources and
maintain the total emissions for the area at the attainment year
inventory level as required by the transportation conformity
regulations. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed
in this document.
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that
this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to approve pre-
existing requirements under state law and does not impose any
additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does
not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect
small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because
it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not
have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified
in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action
merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a Federal
standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This
proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This proposed rule does
not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: March 10, 2003.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 03-6584 Filed 3-18-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P