97-15567. Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia: Determination of Attainment of Ozone Standard and Determination Regarding Applicability of Certain Requirements in the Richmond Area  

  • [Federal Register Volume 62, Number 114 (Friday, June 13, 1997)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 32204-32207]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 97-15567]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    
    40 CFR Part 52
    
    [VA-076-5022a; FRL-5841-5]
    
    
    Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
    Virginia: Determination of Attainment of Ozone Standard and 
    Determination Regarding Applicability of Certain Requirements in the 
    Richmond Area
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    
    ACTION: Direct final rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: EPA has determined that the Richmond ozone nonattainment area 
    has attained the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for 
    ozone. This determination is based upon three years of ambient air 
    monitoring data for the years 1993-95 that demonstrate that the ozone 
    NAAQS has been attained in this area. EPA has also determined that 
    Richmond has continued to attain the standard to date. On the basis of 
    this determination, EPA is also determining that certain reasonable 
    further progress and attainment demonstration requirements, along with 
    certain other related requirements, of Part D of Title I of the Clean 
    Air Act are not applicable to this area as long as this area continues 
    to attain the ozone NAAQS.
    
    DATES: This final rule is effective July 28, 1997 unless within July 
    14, 1997,
    
    [[Page 32205]]
    
    adverse or critical comments are received. If the effective date is 
    delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.
    
    ADDRESSES: Written comments may be mailed to David L. Arnold, Chief, 
    Ozone/Carbon Monoxide, and Mobile Sources Section, Mailcode 3AT21, U.S. 
    Environmental Protection Agency--Region III, 841 Chestnut Building, 
    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19107. Copies of the documents relevant to 
    this action are available for public inspection during normal business 
    hours at the Air, Radiation, and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental 
    Protection Agency, Region III, 841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, 
    Pennsylvania 19107. Persons interested in examining these documents 
    should schedule an appointment with the contact person (listed below) 
    at least 24 hours before the visiting day.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Cripps, Ozone/Carbon 
    Monoxide and Mobile Sources Section (3AT21), U.S. Environmental 
    Protection Agency--Region III, 841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, 
    Pennsylvania 19107, or by telephone at: (215) 566-2179. Questions may 
    also be sent via e-mail, to the following address: 
    Cripps.Christopher@epamail.epa.gov (Please note that only written 
    comments can be accepted for inclusion in the docket.)
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    I. Background
    
        Subpart 2 of Part D of Title I of the Clean Air Act contains 
    various air quality planning and State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
    submission requirements for ozone nonattainment areas. EPA considers it 
    is reasonable to interpret provisions regarding reasonable further 
    progress (RFP) and attainment demonstrations, along with certain other 
    related provisions, so as not to require SIP submissions if an ozone 
    nonattainment area subject to those requirements is monitoring 
    attainment of the ozone standard (i.e., attainment of the NAAQS 
    demonstrated with three consecutive years of complete, quality assured 
    air quality monitoring data). As described below, EPA has previously 
    interpreted the general provisions of subpart 1 of part D of Title I 
    (sections 171 and 172) so as not to require the submission of SIP 
    revisions concerning RFP, attainment demonstrations, or contingency 
    measures. As explained in a memorandum dated May 10, 1995, from John S. 
    Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards to the 
    Regional Air Division Directors, entitled ``Reasonable Further 
    Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and Related Requirements for Ozone 
    Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 
    Standard'', EPA concludes that it is appropriate to interpret the more 
    specific RFP, attainment demonstration and related provisions of 
    subpart 2 in the same manner.
        First, with respect to RFP, section 171(1) states that, for 
    purposes of part D of Title I, RFP ``means such annual incremental 
    reductions in emissions of the relevant air pollutant as are required 
    by this part or may reasonably be required by the Administrator for the 
    purpose of ensuring attainment of the applicable national ambient air 
    quality standard by the applicable date.'' Thus, whether dealing with 
    the general RFP requirement of section 172(c)(2), or the more specific 
    RFP requirements of subpart 2 for classified ozone nonattainment areas 
    (such as the 15 percent plan requirement of section 182(b)(1)), the 
    stated purpose of RFP is to ensure attainment by the applicable 
    attainment date.1 If an area has in fact attained the 
    standard, the stated purpose of the RFP requirement will have already 
    been fulfilled and EPA concludes that the area does not need to submit 
    revisions providing for the further emission reductions described in 
    the RFP provisions of section 182(b)(1).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \1\ EPA notes that paragraph (1) of subsection 182(b) is 
    entitled ``Plan Provisions for Reasonable Further Progress'' and 
    that subparagraph (B) of paragraph 182(c)(2) is entitled 
    ``Reasonable Further Progress Demonstration,'' thereby making it 
    clear that both the 15 percent plan requirement of section 182(b)(1) 
    and the 3 percent per year requirement of section 182(c)(2) are 
    specific varieties of RFP requirements.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        EPA notes that it took this view with respect to the general RFP 
    requirement of section 172(c)(2) in the General Preamble for the 
    Interpretation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (57 
    FR 13498 (April 16, 1992)), and it is now extending that interpretation 
    to the specific provisions of subpart 2. In the General Preamble, EPA 
    stated, in the context of a discussion of the requirements applicable 
    to the evaluation of requests to redesignate nonattainment areas to 
    attainment, that the ``requirements for RFP will not apply in 
    evaluating a request for redesignation to attainment since, at a 
    minimum, the air quality data for the area must show that the area has 
    already attained. Showing that the Commonwealth will make RFP towards 
    attainment will, therefore, have no meaning at that point.'' (57 FR at 
    13564.) 2
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \2\ See also ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate 
    Areas to Attainment,'' from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 
    Management Division, to Regional Air Division Directors, September 
    4, 1992, at page 6 (stating that the ``requirements for reasonable 
    further progress * * * will not apply for redesignations because 
    they only have meaning for areas not attaining the standard'') 
    (hereinafter referred to as ``September 1992 Calcagni memorandum'').
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        Second, with respect to the attainment demonstration requirements 
    of section 182(b)(1), an analogous rationale leads to the same result. 
    Section 182(b)(1) requires that the plan provide for ``such specific 
    annual reductions in emissions * * * as necessary to attain the 
    national primary ambient air quality standard by the attainment date 
    applicable under this Act.'' As with the RFP requirements, if an area 
    has in fact monitored attainment of the standard, EPA concludes there 
    is no need for an area to make a further submission containing 
    additional measures to achieve attainment. This is also consistent with 
    the interpretation of certain section 172(c) requirements provided by 
    EPA in the General Preamble to Title I, as EPA stated there that no 
    other measures to provide for attainment would be needed by areas 
    seeking redesignation to attainment since ``attainment will have been 
    reached.'' (57 FR at 13564; see also September 1992 Calcagni memorandum 
    at page 6.) Upon attainment of the NAAQS, the focus of state planning 
    efforts shifts to maintenance of the NAAQS and the development of a 
    maintenance plan under section 175A.
        Similar reasoning applies to the contingency measure requirements 
    of section 172(c)(9). EPA has previously interpreted the contingency 
    measure requirement of section 172(c)(9) as no longer being applicable 
    once an area has attained the standard since those ``contingency 
    measures are directed at ensuring RFP and attainment by the applicable 
    date.'' (57 FR at 13564; see also September 1992 Calcagni memorandum at 
    page 6.) Similarly, as the section 172(c)(9) contingency measures are 
    linked with the RFP requirements of section 182(b)(1), the requirement 
    no longer applies once an area has attained the standard.
        EPA emphasizes that the lack of a requirement to submit the SIP 
    revisions discussed above exists only for as long as an area designated 
    nonattainment continues to attain the standard. If EPA subsequently 
    determines that such an area has violated the NAAQS, the basis for the 
    determination that the area need not make the pertinent SIP revisions 
    would no longer exist. The EPA would notify the Commonwealth of that 
    determination and would also provide notice to the public in the 
    Federal
    
    [[Page 32206]]
    
    Register. Such a determination would mean that the area would have to 
    address the pertinent SIP requirements within a reasonable amount of 
    time, which EPA would establish taking into account the individual 
    circumstances surrounding the particular SIP submissions at issue. 
    Thus, a determination that an area need not submit one of the SIP 
    submittals amounts to no more than a suspension of the requirement for 
    so long as the area continues to attain the standard.
        The Commonwealth must continue to operate an appropriate air 
    quality monitoring network, in accordance with 40 CFR Part 58, to 
    verify the attainment status of the area. The air quality data relied 
    upon to determine that the area is attaining the ozone standard must be 
    consistent with 40 CFR Part 58 requirements and other relevant EPA 
    guidance and recorded in EPA's Aerometric Information Retrieval System 
    (AIRS).
        The determinations that are being made by this action are not 
    equivalent to the redesignation of the area to attainment. Attainment 
    of the ozone NAAQS is only one of the criteria set forth in section 
    107(d)(3)(E) that must be satisfied for an area to be redesignated to 
    attainment. To be redesignated the Commonwealth must submit and receive 
    full approval of a redesignation request for the area that satisfies 
    all of the criteria of that section, including the requirement of a 
    demonstration that the improvement in the area's air quality is due to 
    permanent and enforceable reductions, that the area has a fully-
    approved SIP meeting all of the applicable requirements under section 
    110 and Part D, and of a fully-approved maintenance plan. On July 26, 
    1996 the Commonwealth of Virginia submitted a redesignation request and 
    maintenance plan for the Richmond area.
        The redesignation request and maintenance plan is the subject of a 
    separate rulemaking action.
        Furthermore, the determinations of this action will not shield an 
    area from future EPA action to require emissions reductions from 
    sources in the area where there is evidence, such as photochemical grid 
    modeling, showing that emissions from sources in the area contribute 
    significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with maintenance by, 
    other nonattainment areas. EPA has authority under sections 
    110(a)(2)(A) and 110(a)(2)(D) to require such emission reductions as 
    necessary and appropriate to deal with transport situations.
    
    II. Analysis of Air Quality Data
    
        EPA has reviewed the ambient air monitoring data for ozone 
    (consistent with the requirements contained in 40 CFR Part 58 and 
    recorded in AIRS) for the Richmond moderate ozone nonattainment area in 
    the Commonwealth of Virginia from 1993 through the present time. On the 
    basis of that review EPA has concluded that the area attained the ozone 
    standard during the 1993-95 period and continues to attain the standard 
    through the present time.
        The current design value for the Richmond nonattainment area, 
    computed using ozone monitoring data for 1994 through 1996, is 116 
    parts per billion (ppb). The average annual number of expected 
    exceedances is 0.7 for that same time period. For the 1993 to 1995 time 
    period, the average annual number of expected exceedances was 1.0, and 
    the corresponding design value was 124 ppb. An area is considered in 
    attainment of the standard if the average annual number of expected 
    exceedances is less than or equal to 1.0. Thus, this areas is no longer 
    recording violations of the air quality standard for ozone. A more 
    detailed summary of the ozone monitoring data for the area is provided 
    in the Technical Support Document (TSD) for this action. A copy of this 
    TSD is available from the EPA Regional Office listed in the ADDRESSES 
    section of this document.
        EPA's review of this material indicates that the Richmond area 
    attained the NAAQS for ozone based upon air quality monitoring data for 
    1993 to 1995 and has continued to attain the standard to date. EPA is 
    making this determination regarding the applicability of certain 
    requirements without prior proposal. However, in a separate document in 
    this Federal Register publication, EPA is proposing to approve the SIP 
    revision should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will 
    be effective July 28, 1997 unless, within 30 days of publication, 
    adverse or critical comments are received.
        If EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn before 
    the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will 
    withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be 
    addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a 
    proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this 
    action. Any and all parties interested in commenting on this action 
    should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public 
    is advised that this action will be effective on July 28, 1997.
    
    Final Action
    
        EPA has determined that the Richmond ozone nonattainment area has 
    attained the ozone standard and continues to attain the standard at 
    this time. As a consequence of this determination, the requirements of 
    section 182(b)(1) concerning the submission of the 15 percent plan and 
    ozone attainment demonstration and the requirements of section 
    172(c)(9) concerning contingency measures are no longer applicable to 
    the area so long as the area does not violate the ozone standard.
        EPA emphasizes that this determination will be contingent upon the 
    continued monitoring and continued attainment and maintenance of the 
    ozone NAAQS in the affected area. When and if a violation of the ozone 
    NAAQS is monitored in the Richmond nonattainment areas (consistent with 
    the requirements contained in 40 CFR Part 58 and recorded in AIRS), EPA 
    will provide notice to the public in the Federal Register. Such a 
    violation would mean that the area would thereafter have to address the 
    requirements of section 182(b)(1) and section 172(c)(9) since the basis 
    for the determination that they do not apply would no longer exist.
        As a consequence of the determination that these areas have 
    attained the NAAQS and that the RFP and attainment demonstration 
    requirements of section 182(b)(1) do not presently apply, the sanctions 
    and Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) clocks started by EPA on January 
    20, 1994, for failure to submit the RFP SIP required under section 
    182(b)(1) are hereby stopped since the deficiency for which the clocks 
    were started no longer exists.
        Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or 
    allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for 
    revision to any state implementation plan. Each request for revision to 
    the state implementation plan shall be considered separately in light 
    of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in 
    relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.
    
    Administrative Requirements
    
    I. Executive Order 12866
    
        This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature 
    by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the 
    Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR
    
    [[Page 32207]]
    
    2214-2225), as revised by a July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, 
    Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation. The Office of Management 
    and Budget (OMB) has exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 
    review.
    
    II. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    
        Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA 
    must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of 
    any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. 
    Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a 
    significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small 
    entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, 
    and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than 
    50,000. Today's determination does not create any new requirements, but 
    suspends the indicated requirements. Therefore, because this action 
    does not impose any new requirements, I certify that it does not have a 
    significant impact on any small entities affected.
    
    III. Unfunded Mandates
    
        Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
    (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA 
    must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or 
    final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated 
    costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to 
    private sector, of $100 million or more.
        Under section 205, EPA must select the most cost-effective and 
    least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule 
    and is consistent with statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA 
    to establish a plan for informing and advising any small governments 
    that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule. EPA has 
    determined that the action promulgated does not include a Federal 
    mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or more to 
    either State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the 
    private sector. This Federal action does not create any new 
    requirements, but suspends the indicated requirements. Accordingly, no 
    additional costs to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the 
    private sector, result from this action.
    
    IV. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
    
        Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business 
    Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted a report 
    containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, 
    the U.S. House of Representatives and the Comptroller General of the 
    General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's 
    Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 
    U.S.C. 804(2).
    
    V. Petitions for Judicial Review
    
        Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
    judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
    of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by August 12, 1997. Filing a 
    petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
    does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial 
    review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial 
    review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such 
    rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings 
    to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
        The Administrator's decision to issue a determination that the 
    Richmond area has attained the NAAQS for ozone and that certain 
    reasonable further progress and attainment demonstration requirements, 
    along with certain other related requirements, of Part D of Title I of 
    the Clean Air Act are not applicable to this area as long as this area 
    continues to attain the ozone NAAQS will be based on whether it meets 
    the requirements of section 110(a)(2) (A)-(K) and part D of the Clean 
    Air Act, as amended, and EPA regulations in 40 CFR Part 51.
    
    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
    
        Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, 
    Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone.
    
        Dated: June 5, 1997.
    W. Michael McCabe,
    Regional Administrator, Region III.
    
        40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
    
    PART 52--[AMENDED]
    
        1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
    
        Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
    
    Subpart VV--Virginia
    
        2. Section 52.2428 is added to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 52.2428  Control Strategy: Carbon monoxide and ozone.
    
        Determination--EPA has determined that, as of July 28, 1997, the 
    Richmond ozone nonattainment area, which consists of the counties of 
    Charles City, Chesterfield, Hanover and Henrico, and of the cities of 
    Richmond, Colonial Heights and Hopewell, has attained the ozone 
    standard and that the reasonable further progress and attainment 
    demonstration requirements of section 182(b)(1) and related 
    requirements of section 172(c)(9) of the Clean Air Act do not apply to 
    this area for so long as the Richmond ozone nonattainment area does not 
    monitor any violations of the ozone standard. If a violation of the 
    ozone NAAQS is monitored in the Richmond ozone nonattainment area, 
    these determinations shall no longer apply.
    
    [FR Doc. 97-15567 Filed 6-12-97; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
7/28/1997
Published:
06/13/1997
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Direct final rule.
Document Number:
97-15567
Dates:
This final rule is effective July 28, 1997 unless within July 14, 1997, adverse or critical comments are received. If the effective date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.
Pages:
32204-32207 (4 pages)
Docket Numbers:
VA-076-5022a, FRL-5841-5
PDF File:
97-15567.pdf
CFR: (1)
40 CFR 52.2428