[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 81 (Friday, April 27, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 20966-20977]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-8114]



[[Page 20966]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R04-OAR-2006-0584-200701-; FRL-8306-4]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and 
Designations of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Kentucky: 
Redesignation of the Kentucky Portion of the Louisville 8-Hour Ozone 
Nonattainment Area to Attainment for Ozone

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On September 29, 2006, the Commonwealth of Kentucky 
(Kentucky), through the Kentucky Division for Air Quality (KDAQ), 
submitted a request to redesignate the Kentucky portion of the bi-State 
Louisville 8-hour ozone nonattainment area to attainment for the 8-hour 
National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS); and to approve a State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision containing a maintenance plan for 
the Kentucky portion of the bi-State Louisville area. The Kentucky 
portion of the bi-State Louisville 8-hour ozone nonattainment area 
(hereafter referred to as the ``Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area'') is 
comprised of three Kentucky Counties--Bullitt, Jefferson and Oldham. 
The Indiana portion of the bi-State Louisville 8-hour ozone 
nonattainment area is comprised of two Indiana Counties--Clark and 
Floyd. In this action, EPA is proposing to approve Kentucky's 8-hour 
ozone redesignation request for the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area. 
Additionally, EPA is proposing to approve the 8-hour ozone maintenance 
plan for the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area, including the regional 
motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) for nitrogen oxides 
(NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). This proposed 
approval of Kentucky's redesignation request is based upon EPA's 
determination that Kentucky has demonstrated that the Kentucky Bi-State 
Louisville Area has met the criteria for redesignation to attainment 
specified in the Clean Air Act (CAA), including the determination that 
the entire (both the Kentucky and Indiana portions) Bi-State Louisville 
8-hour ozone nonattainment area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard. 
In July and September 2006, Indiana submitted a redesignation request 
and maintenance plan for the Indiana portion of this 8-hour ozone area. 
EPA is taking action on that redesignation request and maintenance plan 
in a separate action. In this action, EPA is also notifying the public 
that EPA is reviewing the 2003 and 2020 regional MVEBs for 
NOX and VOCs submitted by Kentucky as part of its 
maintenance plan, for adequacy. These regional MVEBs are identical to 
those contained in the Indiana submittal for the bi-State area. During 
the comment period for this proposal, the public may also comment on 
the adequacy of the proposed regional MVEBs.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 29, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2006-0584, by one of the following methods:
    (a) www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    (b) E-mail: [email protected].
    (c) Fax: 404-562-9019.
    (d) Mail: EPA-R04-OAR-2006-0584 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.
    (e) Hand Delivery or Courier: Heidi LeSane, 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. Such deliveries are only 
accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The 
Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 
8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2006-0584, EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, 
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov or e-
mail, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. 
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, 
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information 
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, 
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part 
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available 
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends 
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of 
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read 
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic 
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of 
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional 
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center 
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or 
in hard copy at the 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. EPA requests that if at all possible, you 
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official 
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding 
Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Heidi LeSane, 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. The telephone number is (404) 
562-9074. Mrs. LeSane can also be reached via electronic mail at 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What Proposed Actions Is EPA Taking?
II. What Is the Background for EPA's Proposed Actions?
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation?
IV. Why Is EPA Proposing These Actions?
V. What Is the Effect of EPA's Proposed Actions?
VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Request?

[[Page 20967]]

VII. What Are the Proposed Regional MVEBs for the Bi-State 
Louisville 8-Hour Ozone Area?
VIII. What Is the Status of EPA's Adequacy Determination for the 
MVEBs for the Bi-State Louisville 8-Hour Ozone Area?
IX. Proposed Action on the Redesignation Request and Maintenance 
Plan SIP Revision, Including Proposed Approval of the 2003 and 2020 
MVEBs
X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Proposed Actions Is EPA Taking?

    EPA is proposing to take three related actions, which are 
summarized below and described in greater detail throughout the notice 
of proposed rulemaking: (1) To redesignate the Kentucky Bi-State 
Louisville Area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS; (2) to 
approve Kentucky's 8-hour ozone maintenance plan, including the 
associated MVEBs; and (3) to notify the public that EPA is reviewing 
regional MVEBs for adequacy.
    First, EPA is proposing to determine that the Kentucky Bi-State 
Louisville Area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard, and has met the 
requirements for redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. 
The entire bi-State Louisville 8-hour ozone nonattainment area is 
comprised of three Kentucky Counties--Bullitt, Jefferson, and Oldham, 
and two Indiana Counties--Clark and Floyd. Today's proposal addresses 
only the Kentucky portion of the bi-State Louisville 8-hour ozone area. 
EPA will take action on the redesignation request and maintenance plan 
for the Indiana portion of this area in a separate action. EPA is now 
proposing to approve a request to change the legal designation of 
Bullitt, Jefferson, and Oldham Counties in Kentucky from nonattainment 
to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    Second, EPA is proposing to approve Kentucky's 8-hour ozone 
maintenance plan for the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area (such 
approval being one of the CAA criteria for redesignation to attainment 
status). The maintenance plan is designed to help keep the Kentucky Bi-
State Louisville Area in attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS through 
2020. Consistent with the CAA, the maintenance plan that EPA is 
proposing to approve today also includes 2003 and 2020 regional MVEBs 
for NOX and VOCs. Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve the 
2003 and 2020 regional MVEBs that are included as part of Kentucky's 
maintenance plan. These regional MVEBs apply to both the Kentucky and 
Indiana portions of this bi-State 8-hour ozone area.
    Third, EPA is notifying the public in today's notice of proposed 
rulemaking that EPA is reviewing the 2003 and 2020 regional MVEBs for 
NOX and VOCs, as provided in the Kentucky submittal, for 
adequacy pursuant to 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2). The public may comment at 
this time on whether the proposed MVEBs meet the adequacy criteria 
found in EPA's conformity regulations, 40 CFR 93.118(e).
    Today's notice of proposed rulemaking is in response to Kentucky's 
September 29, 2006, SIP submittal which supersedes Kentucky's June 7, 
2006, submittal that included a request for parallel processing. The 
September 29, 2006, submittal requested redesignation of the Kentucky 
bi-State Louisville Area, and included a SIP revision addressing the 
specific issues summarized above, and the necessary elements for 
redesignation described in section 107(d)(3)(E).

II. What Is the Background for EPA's Proposed Actions?

    Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather, 
emissions of NOX and VOCs react in the presence of sunlight 
to form ground-level ozone. NOX and VOCs are referred to as 
precursors of ozone. The CAA establishes a process for air quality 
management through the NAAQS.
    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone standard 
of 0.08 parts per million (ppm). This new standard is more stringent 
than the previous 1-hour ozone standard. Under EPA regulations at 40 
CFR part 50, the 8-hour ozone standard is attained when the 3-year 
average of the annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average 
ambient air quality ozone concentrations is less than or equal to 0.08 
ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when rounding is considered). (See, 69 FR 23857 
(April 30, 2004) for further information). Ambient air quality 
monitoring data for the 3-year period must meet a data completeness 
requirement. The ambient air quality monitoring data completeness 
requirement is met when the average percent of days with valid ambient 
monitoring data is greater than 90 percent, and no single year has less 
than 75 percent data completeness as determined in Appendix I of part 
50. Specifically, section 2.3 of 40 CFR part 50, Appendix I, 
``Comparisons with the Primary and Secondary Ozone Standards'' states:

    ``The primary and secondary ozone ambient air quality standards 
are met at an ambient air quality monitoring site when the 3-year 
average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average 
ozone concentration is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm. The number of 
significant figures in the level of the standard dictates the 
rounding convention for comparing the computed 3-year average annual 
fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration with 
the level of the standard. The third decimal place of the computed 
value is rounded, with values equal to or greater than 5 rounding 
up. Thus, a computed 3-year average ozone concentration of 0.085 ppm 
is the smallest value that is greater than 0.08 ppm.''

    The CAA required EPA to designate as nonattainment any area that 
was violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the three most recent 
years of ambient air quality data. The entire bi-State Louisville 8-
hour ozone nonattainment area was designated using 2001-2003 ambient 
air quality data. The Federal Register document making these 
designations was signed on April 15, 2004, and published on April 30, 
2004 (69 FR 23857). The CAA contains two sets of provisions--subpart 1 
and subpart 2--that address planning and control requirements for ozone 
nonattainment areas. (Both are found in title I, part D.) Subpart 1 
(which covers areas that EPA refers to as ``basic'' nonattainment) 
contains general, less prescriptive, requirements for nonattainment 
areas for any pollutant--including ozone--governed by a NAAQS. Subpart 
2 (which covers areas that EPA refers to as ``classified'' 
nonattainment) provides more specific requirements for certain ozone 
nonattainment areas. Some 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are subject 
only to the provisions of subpart 1. Other 8-hour ozone nonattainment 
areas are also subject to the provisions of subpart 2. Under EPA's 
Phase 1 8-hour ozone implementation rule (69 FR 23857) (Phase 1 Rule), 
signed on April 15, 2004 and published on April 30, 2004, an area was 
classified under subpart 2 based on its 8-hour ozone design value 
(i.e., the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-
hour average ozone concentrations), if it had a 1-hour design value at 
or above 0.121 ppm (the lowest 1-hour design value in Table 1 of 
subpart 2). All other areas are covered under subpart 1, based upon 
their 8-hour ambient air quality design values.
    Various aspects of EPA's Phase 1 8-hour ozone implementation rule 
were challenged in court and on December 22, 2006, the U.S. Court of 
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit Court) 
vacated EPA's Phase 1 Implementation Rule for the 8-hour Ozone 
Standard. South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. (SCAQMD) v. EPA, 472 
F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006). The D.C. Circuit Court held that certain

[[Page 20968]]

provisions of EPA's Phase I Rule were inconsistent with the 
requirements of the CAA. The Court rejected EPA's reasons for 
implementing the 8-hour standard in nonattainment areas under subpart 1 
in lieu of subpart 2 of title I, part D of the CAA. The Court also held 
that EPA improperly failed to retain four measures required for 1-hour 
nonattainment areas under the anti-backsliding provisions of EPA's 
regulations: (1) Nonattainment area New Source Review (NSR) 
requirements based on an area's 1-hour nonattainment classification; 
(2) CAA section 185 penalty fees for 1-hour severe or extreme 
nonattainment areas; (3) measures to be implemented pursuant to section 
172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the CAA, on the contingency of an area not 
making reasonable further progress toward attainment of the 1-hour 
NAAQS, or for failure to attain that NAAQS; and (4) certain conformity 
requirements for certain types of Federal actions. The D.C. Circuit 
Court upheld EPA's authority to revoke the 1-hour standard provided 
that there were adequate anti-backsliding provisions in place.
    This section sets forth EPA's views on the potential effect of the 
Court's ruling on this redesignation action. For the reasons described 
throughout this notice of proposed rulemaking, EPA does not believe 
that the D.C. Circuit Court's ruling alters any requirements relevant 
to the redesignation of the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area so as to 
preclude redesignation, and does not prevent EPA from proposing to 
finalize, or finalizing, the Louisville redesignation. EPA believes 
that the Court's decision, as it currently stands or as it may be 
modified based upon the petitions for rehearing that have been filed, 
imposes no impediment to moving forward with redesignation of the 
Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area to attainment, because redesignation 
is appropriate under the relevant redesignation provisions of the CAA 
and longstanding policies regarding redesignation requests.
    The Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area was originally designated as 
moderate nonattainment for the 1-hour ozone standard in November 6, 
1991 (56 FR 56694). The Area was redesignated as attainment for the 1-
hour ozone standard on October 23, 2001 (66 FR 53665). On April 30, 
2004, EPA designated the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area as a 
``basic'' 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. (69 FR 23857).
    The D.C. Circuit Court's decision in 2006 also addressed the 8-hour 
ozone classification scheme. The Court rejected EPA's reasons for 
classifying areas under subpart 1 for the 8-hour standard, and remanded 
that matter to the Agency. Consequently, it is possible that the 
Kentucky Bi-State Louisville area could, as a result of the remand to 
EPA, be reclassified under subpart 2. Although any future decision by 
EPA to classify this area under subpart 2 might trigger additional 
future requirements for the area, this does not mean that redesignation 
cannot go forward now. EPA's position is based upon: (1) EPA's 
longstanding policy of evaluating requirements in accordance with the 
requirements due at the time that the request is submitted; and (2) 
consideration of the inequity of retroactively applying any 
requirements that might be applied in the future.
    In September 2006, when Kentucky submitted its final redesignation 
request, the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area was classified under 
subpart 1 of the CAA, and was obligated to meet only the subpart 1 
requirements. Under EPA's longstanding interpretation of section 
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, to qualify for redesignation, States 
requesting redesignation to attainment must meet only the relevant SIP 
requirements that came due prior to the submittal of a complete 
redesignation request. See, ``Procedures for Processing Requests to 
Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, 
Director, Air Quality Management Division, September 4, 1992; see also, 
Michael Shapiro Memorandum, ``SIP Requirements for Areas Submitting 
Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon 
Monoxide NAAQS On or After November 15, 1992,'' Memorandum from Michael 
H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, 
September 17, 1993; and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66 (March 7, 
1995)(redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor). See, Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 
F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004), which upheld this interpretation. See also, 
68 FR 25418, 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of St. Louis, 
Missouri).
    Moreover, it would be inequitable to retroactively apply any new 
SIP requirements that were not applicable at the time the request was 
submitted. The D.C. Circuit Court recognized the general inequity in 
retroactive rulemakings in Sierra Club v. Whitman, 285 F. 3d 63 (D.C. 
Cir. 2002), in which the D.C. Circuit Court upheld a district court's 
refusal to make retroactive an EPA determination of nonattainment that 
was past the statutory due date. Such a determination would have 
resulted in the imposition of additional requirements on the area. In 
Sierra Club, the D.C. Circuit Court stated, ``[a]lthough EPA failed to 
make the nonattainment determination within the statutory time frame, 
Sierra Club's proposed solution only makes the situation worse. 
Retroactive relief would likely impose large costs on the States, which 
would face fines and suits for not implementing air pollution 
prevention plans in 1997, even though they were not on notice at the 
time.'' Id. at 68. Similarly, with regard to Kentucky's redesignation 
request, it would be unfair to penalize Kentucky by retroactively 
applying to it for purposes of redesignation, additional SIP 
requirements under subpart 2 that were not in effect at the time it 
submitted its redesignation request, and that are not currently in 
effect, but that might be in effect as a result of the D.C. Circuit 
Court's remand.
    With respect to the requirements under the 1-hour standard ozone 
standard, the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area was originally 
designated as moderate nonattainment for the 1-hour ozone standard in 
November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56694). The Area was redesignated as attainment 
for the 1-hour ozone standard on October 23, 2001 (66 FR 53665). 
Therefore, the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area was designated to 
attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard prior to its nonattainment 
designation for the 8-hour ozone standard. As a result, it is 
considered to be a 1-hour attainment area subject to a CAA section 175A 
maintenance plan for the 1-hour standard. The D.C. Circuit Court's 
ruling does not impact redesignation requests for these types of areas 
for two main reasons.
    First, there are no conformity requirements relevant for the 
Louisville redesignation request, such as a transportation conformity 
SIP.\1\ It is EPA's longstanding policy position that it is reasonable 
to interpret the conformity SIP requirements as not applying for 
purposes of evaluating a redesignation request under section 107(d) 
because State conformity rules are still required after redesignation, 
and Federal conformity rules apply where State rules have not been 
approved. See, 40 CFR 51.390; see also, Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th 
Cir. 2001) (upholding EPA's interpretation).

[[Page 20969]]

See also, 60 FR 62748 (Dec. 7, 1995) (redesignation of Tampa, Florida).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ CAA section 176(c)(4)(E) requires states to submit revisions 
to their SIPs to reflect certain federal criteria and procedures for 
determining transportation conformity. Transportation conformity 
SIPs are different from the motor vehicle emissions budgets that are 
established in control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, with regard to the three other anti-backsliding provisions 
for the 1-hour standard that the D.C. Circuit Court found were not 
properly retained, the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area is an 
attainment area subject to a maintenance plan for the 1-hour standard, 
and the NSR, contingency measure (pursuant to section 172(c)(9) or 
182(c)(9)), and fee provision requirements no longer apply to this area 
because it was redesignated to attainment of the 1-hour standard. As a 
result, the decision in SCAQMD should not alter any requirements that 
would preclude EPA from finalizing the redesignation of Kentucky Bi-
State Louisville Area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard.
    As noted earlier, in 2005, the ambient ozone data for the Kentucky 
Bi-State Louisville Area indicated no further violations of the 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS, using data from the 3-year period of 2003-2005 to 
demonstrate attainment. As a result, on September 29, 2006, Kentucky 
requested redesignation of the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area to 
attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The redesignation request 
included three years of complete, quality-assured ambient air quality 
data for the ozone seasons (March 1st until October 31st) of 2003-2005, 
indicating that the 8-hour ozone NAAQS has been achieved for the entire 
Bi-State Louisville area. Under the CAA, nonattainment areas may be 
redesignated to attainment if sufficient, complete, quality-assured 
data is 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).

III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation?

    The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment 
area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA 
allows for redesignation providing that: (1) 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 of the 
CAA.
    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:
    1. ``Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations,'' 
Memorandum from Bill Laxton, Director, Technical Support Division, June 
18, 1990;
    2. ``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;
    3. ``Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) 
Redesignations,'' Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon 
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 1992;
    4. ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to 
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 
Management Division, September 4, 1992 (hereafter referred to as the 
``Calcagni Memorandum'');
    5. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response 
to Clean Air Act Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, 
Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;
    6. ``Technical Support Documents (TSD's) for Redesignation of Ozone 
and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from G. T. 
Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17, 1993;
    7. `` 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;
    8. ``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for 
Ozone and CO Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, 
Acting Director, Air Quality Management Division, November 30, 1993;
    9. ``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
    10. ``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.

IV. Why Is EPA Proposing These Actions?

    On September 29, 2006, Kentucky requested redesignation of the 
Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area from nonattainment to attainment for 
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA's evaluation indicates that Kentucky has 
demonstrated that the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area has attained 
the 8-hour ozone standard and has met the requirements for 
redesignation set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is also 
notifying the public of its review of the adequacy of the proposed 
regional MVEBs, which is relevant to the requested redesignation.

V. What Is the Effect of EPA's Proposed Actions?

    EPA's proposed actions establish the basis upon which EPA may take 
final action on the three issues being proposed for approval today. 
Approval of Kentucky's redesignation request would change the official 
designation of Bullitt, Jefferson, and Oldham Counties in Kentucky for 
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS found at 40 CFR part 81. Approval of Kentucky's 
request would also incorporate into the Kentucky SIP, a plan for 
maintaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville 
Area through 2020. The maintenance plan includes contingency measures 
to remedy future violations of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The maintenance 
plan also establishes regional MVEBs of 40.97 tons per day (tpd) for 
VOC and 95.51 tpd for NOX for the year 2003, and MVEBs of 
22.92 tpd for VOC and 29.46 tpd for NOX for the year 2020. 
Approval of Kentucky's maintenance plan would also result in approval 
of the regional MVEBs. Additionally, EPA is notifying the public that 
it is reviewing the adequacy of the proposed regional MVEBs pursuant to 
40 CFR 93.118(f)(2).

VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Request?

    EPA is proposing to make the determination that the Kentucky Bi-
State Louisville Area has attained the 8-

[[Page 20970]]

hour ozone NAAQS, and that all other redesignation criteria have been 
met. The basis for EPA's determination is discussed in greater detail 
below.

(1) The Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area Has Attained the 8-Hour Ozone 
NAAQS

    EPA is proposing to determine that the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville 
Area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. For ozone, an area may be 
considered to be attaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS if there are no 
violations, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.10 and Appendix 
I of part 50, based on three complete, consecutive calendar years of 
quality-assured air quality monitoring data. To attain this standard, 
the 3-year average of the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour 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 
quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and recorded in the 
EPA Air Quality System (AQS). The monitors generally should have 
remained at the same location for the duration of the monitoring period 
required for demonstrating attainment.
    EPA reviewed ozone monitoring data from ambient ozone monitoring 
stations in the bi-State Louisville area for the ozone season from 
2003-2005. This data has been quality assured and is recorded in AQS. 
The fourth high averages for 2003, 2004 and 2005, and the 3-year 
average of these values (i.e., design value), are summarized in Table 1 
below.

          Table 1.--Annual 4th Max High and Design Value for 8-Hour Ozone for Bi-State Louisville Area
                                            [parts per million, ppm]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                        Design
               Monitor                        County              2003         2004         2005        value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charleston, IN......................  Clark.................        0.090        0.074        0.080        0.081
New Albany, IN......................  Floyd.................        0.086        0.071        0.080        0.079
WLKY, KY............................  Jefferson.............        0.073        0.068        0.074        0.071
Watson, KY..........................  Jefferson.............        0.075        0.070        0.085        0.076
Bates, KY...........................  Jefferson.............        0.072        0.070        0.079        0.073
Shepherdsville, KY..................  Bullitt...............        0.072        0.068        0.080        0.073
Buckner, KY.........................  Oldham................        0.082        0.076        0.089        0.082
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, the design value for an area is the highest 
design value recorded at any monitor in the area. Therefore, the design 
value for the Kentucky Louisville Bi-State Area is 0.082 ppm, which 
meets the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Additionally, preliminary air quality 
data from the 2006 monitoring season indicates that the Kentucky 
Louisville Bi-State Area is continuing to attain the 8-hour ozone 
standard. As is discussed in more detail below, KDAQ has indicated a 
commitment to continue monitoring in the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville 
Area in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. The data submitted by Kentucky 
provides an adequate demonstration that the Kentucky Bi-State 
Louisville Area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

(2) Kentucky Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) for the 
Three Affected Counties and (5) Has Met All Applicable Requirements 
Under Section 110 and Part D of the CAA

    Below is a summary of how these two criteria were met.
    EPA has determined that Kentucky has met all applicable SIP 
requirements for Bullitt, Jefferson and Oldham Counties under section 
110 of the CAA (general SIP requirements). EPA has also determined that 
the Kentucky SIP satisfies the criterion that it meets applicable SIP 
requirements under part D of title I of the CAA (requirements specific 
to subpart 1 basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas), in accordance 
with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, EPA has determined that the 
SIP is fully approved with respect to all applicable requirements in 
accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these 
determinations, EPA ascertained which requirements are applicable to 
the Area and that if applicable, they are fully approved under section 
110(k). SIPs must be fully approved only with respect to applicable 
requirements.
a. Bullitt, Jefferson and Oldham Counties in Kentucky Have Met All 
Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and Part D of the CAA
    The September 4, 1992, Calcagni Memorandum (``Procedures for 
Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' September 4, 
1992) describes EPA's interpretation of section 107(d)(3)(E). 
Consistent with this interpretation, to qualify for redesignation, 
States requesting redesignation to attainment must meet only the 
relevant CAA requirements that come due prior to the submittal of a 
complete redesignation request. See also, Michael Shapiro Memorandum 
(``SIP Requirements for Areas Submitting Requests for Redesignation to 
Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon Monoxide NAAQS On or After November 
15, 1992,'' September 17, 1993), and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66 (March 7, 
1995) (redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor, Michigan). Applicable 
requirements of the CAA that come due subsequent to the area's 
submittal of a complete redesignation request remain applicable until a 
redesignation is approved, but are not required as a prerequisite to 
redesignation. See, section 175A(c) of the CAA; Sierra Club, 375 F.3d 
537 (7th Cir. 2004); see also, 68 FR 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) 
(redesignation of St. Louis, Missouri).
    General SIP requirements. Section 110(a)(2) of title I of the CAA 
delineates the general requirements for a SIP, which include 
enforceable emissions limitations and other control measures, means, 
techniques, or provisions for the establishment and operation of 
appropriate devices necessary to collect data on ambient air quality, 
and programs to enforce the limitations. General SIP elements and 
requirements are delineated in section 110(a)(2) of title I, part A of 
the CAA. These requirements include, but are not limited to, the 
following: submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the State after 
reasonable public notice and hearing; provisions for establishment and 
operation of appropriate procedures needed to monitor ambient air 
quality; implementation of a source permit program; provisions for the 
implementation of part C requirements (Prevention of Significant 
Deterioration (PSD)) and provisions for the implementation of part D 
requirements (New Source Review (NSR) permit

[[Page 20971]]

programs); provisions for air pollution modeling; and provisions for 
public and local agency participation in planning and emission control 
rule development.
    Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to 
prevent sources in a State from significantly contributing to air 
quality problems in another State. To implement this provision, EPA has 
required certain States to establish programs to address the transport 
of air pollutants (NOX SIP Call, Clean Air Interstate Rule 
(CAIR)). EPA has also found, generally, that States have not submitted 
SIPs under section 110(a)(1) to meet the interstate transport 
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). However, the section 
110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a State are not linked with a particular 
nonattainment area's designation and classification in that State. EPA 
believes that the requirements linked with a particular nonattainment 
area's designation and classifications are the relevant measures to 
evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. The transport SIP 
submittal requirements, where applicable, continue to apply to a State 
regardless of the designation of any one particular area in the State. 
Thus, we do not believe that the CAA's interstate transport 
requirements should be construed to be applicable requirements for 
purposes of redesignation.
    In addition, EPA believes that the other section 110 elements not 
connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not linked with an 
area's attainment status are not applicable requirements for purposes 
of redesignation. The State will still be subject to these requirements 
after the area is redesignated. The section 110 and part D 
requirements, which are linked with a particular area's designation and 
classification, are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a 
redesignation request. This approach is consistent with EPA's existing 
policy on applicability (i.e., for redesignations) of conformity and 
oxygenated fuels requirements, as well as with section 184 ozone 
transport requirements. See, Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final 
rulemakings (61 FR 53174-53176, October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7, 
1997); Cleveland-Akron-Loraine, Ohio, final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, 
May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida, final rulemaking at (60 FR 62748, 
December 7, 1995). See also, the discussion on this issue in the 
Cincinnati, Ohio redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 2000), and in the 
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania redesignation (66 FR 50399, October 19, 2001).
    EPA believes that section 110 elements not linked to the area's 
nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation. 
Any section 110 requirements that are linked to the part D requirements 
for 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are not yet due, since, as 
explained below, no part D requirements for the 8-hour standard became 
due prior to submission of the redesignation request. Therefore, as 
discussed earlier, for purposes of redesignation, they are not 
considered applicable requirements. Nonetheless, EPA notes that it has 
previously approved provisions into the Kentucky SIP addressing section 
110 elements under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS (47 FR 30059, July 12, 1982). 
EPA believes that the section 110 SIP approved for the 1-hour ozone 
NAAQS is also sufficient to meet the requirements under the 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS (as well as satisfying the issues raised by the D.C. 
Circuit Court in the SCAQMD case).
    Part D requirements. EPA has also determined that the Kentucky SIP 
meets applicable SIP requirements under part D of the CAA since no 
requirements became due prior to the submission of the area's 
redesignation request. Sections 172-176 of the CAA, found in subpart 1 
of part D, set 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. Subpart 2 is not applicable to the 
Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area.
    Part D, subpart 1 applicable SIP requirements. For purposes of 
evaluating Kentucky's redesignation request, the applicable part D, 
subpart 1 SIP requirements for all nonattainment 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). No requirements applicable for 
purposes of redesignation under part D became due prior to the 
submission of the redesignation request, and therefore none are 
applicable to the area for purposes of redesignation. For example, the 
requirements for an attainment demonstration that meets the 
requirements of section 172(c)(1) are not yet applicable, nor are the 
requirements for Reasonably Achievable Control Technology (RACT) and 
Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) (section 172(c)(1)), 
reasonable further progress (RFP) (section 172(c)(2)), or contingency 
measures (section 172(c)(9)).
    In addition to the fact that no part D requirements applicable for 
purposes of redesignation became due prior to submission of the 
redesignation request, and therefore are not applicable, EPA believes 
it is reasonable to interpret the conformity and NSR requirements as 
not requiring approval prior to EPA final action approving the 
redesignation.
    Section 176 Conformity Requirements: Section 176(c) of the CAA 
requires States to establish criteria and procedures to ensure that 
Federally supported or funded projects conform to the air quality 
planning goals in the applicable SIP. The requirement to determine 
conformity applies to transportation plans, programs and projects 
developed, funded or approved under title 23 of the United States Code 
(U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act (``transportation conformity'') as 
well as to all other Federally supported or funded projects (``general 
conformity''). State conformity revisions must be consistent with 
Federal conformity regulations relating to consultation, enforcement 
and enforceability that the CAA required the EPA to promulgate.
    EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity SIP 
requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating the 
redesignation request under section 107(d) because State conformity 
rules are still required after redesignation and Federal conformity 
rules apply where State rules have not been approved. See, Wall, 265 
F.3d 426 (upholding this interpretation). See also, 60 FR 62748 (Dec. 
7, 1995, Tampa, Florida).
    EPA has also determined that areas being redesignated need not 
comply with the requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to 
redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the 
standard without a part D NSR program in effect since PSD requirements 
will apply after redesignation. The rationale for this view is 
described in a Memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator 
for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled ``Part D New 
Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for Areas Requesting 
Redesignation to Attainment.'' Kentucky has demonstrated that the area 
will be able to maintain the standard without a part D NSR program in 
effect, and therefore, Kentucky need not have a fully approved part D 
NSR program prior to approval of the redesignation request. EPA most 
recently approved Kentucky's NSR program (including a nonattainment NSR 
and PSD program) into the Kentucky SIP on July 11, 2006 (71 FR 38990). 
Kentucky's PSD program

[[Page 20972]]

will become effective in the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area upon 
final redesignation to attainment. See, rulemakings for Detroit, 
Michigan (60 FR 12467-12468, March 7, 1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorraine, 
Ohio (61 FR 20458, 20469-70, May 7, 1996); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 
53665, October 23, 2001); Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31834-31837, 
June 21, 1996). Thus, the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area has 
satisfied all applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation 
under section 110 and part D of the CAA.
b. The Area Has a Fully Approved Applicable SIP Under Section 110(k) of 
the CAA
    EPA has fully approved the applicable Kentucky SIP for Bullitt, 
Jefferson and Oldham Counties in Kentucky 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 Calcagni Memorandum at p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth 
Alliance v. Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989-90 (6th Cir. 1998); Wall, 265 
F.3d 426; plus any additional measures it may approve in conjunction 
with a redesignation action. See, 68 FR 25426 (May 12, 2003), and 
citations contained therein. Following the passage of the CAA of 1970 
by the U.S. Congress, Kentucky adopted and submitted, and EPA has fully 
approved at various times, provisions addressing the various 1-hour 
ozone standard SIP elements applicable in the Bullitt, Jefferson and 
Oldham Counties in the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area (66 FR 53665, 
October 23, 2001).
    As indicated above, EPA believes that the section 110 elements not 
connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not linked to the 
area's nonattainment status are not applicable requirements for 
purposes of redesignation. EPA also believes that since the part D 
requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation did not become 
due prior to submission of the redesignation request, they also are 
therefore not applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation.

(3) The Air Quality Improvement in the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville 
Area Is Due to Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions 
Resulting From Implementation of the SIP and Applicable Federal Air 
Pollution Control Regulations and Other Permanent and Enforceable 
Reductions

    EPA believes that Kentucky has demonstrated that the observed air 
quality improvement in the area is due to permanent and enforceable 
reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the SIP, 
Federal measures, and other State-adopted measures. EPA has determined 
that the implementation of the following permanent and enforceable 
emissions controls, that occurred from 2002-2005, have reduced local 
NOX and VOC emissions and brought the area into attainment:

                  2002-2005 Emission Reduction Programs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Highway Mobile Source Reductions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Federal Motor Vehicle Control Programs (FMVCP).
Tier 2 Vehicle Emissions and Fuel Standards
Heavy Duty Engine, Vehicle and Fuel Standards.
 
                   Point Source Emissions Reductions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM).
Maximum Available Control Technology (MACT).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                         Area Source Reductions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Open burning regulations for former 1-hour ozone area.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                          Additional Reductions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
NOX SIP Call Reductions
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notably, no credit specific emission reduction is being claimed in the 
SIP for the NOX SIP call reductions although this program 
has resulted in measurable emissions reductions.
    Kentucky has demonstrated that the implementation of permanent and 
enforceable emissions controls have reduced local VOC and 
NOX emissions. Most of the reductions are attributable to 
Federal programs such as EPA's Tier 2/Low Sulfur Gasoline program and 
other national clean fuel programs that began implementation in 2004. 
Additionally, Kentucky has indicated in its September 2006 SIP 
submittal that the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area has benefited from 
emissions reductions that have been achieved, and will continue to be 
achieved, through the implementation of the NOX SIP Call, 
beginning in 2002. Kentucky has further demonstrated that year-to-year 
meteorological changes and trends are not the likely source of the 
overall, long-term improvements in ozone levels. In addition, the 
following non-highway mobile source reduction programs were implemented 
during the 2002-2004 period: small spark-ignition engines, large-spark 
ignition engines, locomotives and land-base diesel engines. EPA 
believes that permanent and enforceable emissions reductions, in and 
surrounding the nonattainment area, are the cause of long-term 
improvements in ozone levels, and are the cause of the Kentucky Bi-
State Louisville Area achieving attainment of the 8-hour ozone 
standard.

(4) The Area Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 
175A of the CAA

    In its request to redesignate Bullitt, Jefferson and Oldham 
Counties in Kentucky to attainment, KDAQ submitted a SIP revision to 
provide for the maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Kentucky 
Bi-State Louisville Area for at least 10 years after the effective date 
of redesignation to attainment.
a. What is required in a maintenance plan?
    Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance 
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. 
Under section 175A, the plan must demonstrate continued attainment of 
the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after the Administrator 
approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after the 
redesignation, Kentucky must submit a revised maintenance plan which 
demonstrates that attainment will continue to be maintained for the 10 
years following the initial 10-year period. To address the possibility 
of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must contain such 
contingency measures, with a schedule for implementation as EPA deems 
necessary to assure prompt correction of any future 8-hour ozone 
violations. Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a 
maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to 
attainment. The Calcagni Memorandum provides additional guidance on the 
content of a maintenance plan. The Calcagni Memorandum explains that an 
ozone maintenance plan should address five requirements: The attainment 
emissions inventory, maintenance demonstration, monitoring, 
verification of continued attainment, and a contingency plan. As is 
discussed more fully below, Kentucky's maintenance plan includes all 
the necessary components and is approvable as part of the redesignation 
request.
b. Attainment Emissions Inventory
    In coordination with Indiana, Kentucky selected 2003 as ``the

[[Page 20973]]

attainment year'' for the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area for the 
purposes of demonstrating attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. This 
attainment inventory identifies the level of emissions in the area 
which is necessary to attain the 8-hour ozone standard. The 2003 VOC 
and NOX emissions (as well as the emissions for other years) 
for Bullitt, Jefferson and Oldham Counties in Kentucky were developed 
consistent with EPA guidance, and are summarized in the table in the 
following subsection.
c. Maintenance Demonstration
    The September 29, 2006, SIP submittal includes a maintenance plan 
for the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area. This demonstration:
    (i) Shows compliance with and maintenance of the 8-hour ozone 
standard by assuring that current and future emissions of VOC and 
NOX will remain at or below attainment year 2003 emissions 
levels. The year 2003 was chosen as the attainment year because it is 
one of the most recent three years (i.e., 2003, 2004, and 2005) for 
which the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area has clean air quality data 
for the 8-hour ozone standard.
    (ii) Uses 2003 as the attainment year and includes actual emissions 
for 2003 and 2005, and future emission inventory projections for 2008, 
2011, 2014, 2017, and 2020.
    (iii) Identifies an ``out year'' at least 10 years after the time 
necessary for EPA to review and approve the maintenance plan. In 
accordance with 40 CFR part 93, regional MVEBs for NOX and 
VOCs were established for the last year of the maintenance plan (in 
addition to 2003).
    (iv) Provides the following actual and projected emissions 
inventories for the Kentucky portion of the bi-State Louisville 
nonattainment area. See, Tables 2 and 3. For informational purposes, a 
summary of the actual and projected emissions inventories for the 
entire bi-State area are also provided. See, Tables 4 and 5.

             Table 2.--Actual and Projected VOC Emissions for Bullitt, Jefferson and Oldham Counties
                                                 [Tons per day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Categories                       2003     2005     2008     2011     2014     2017     2020
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Point
Bullitt..........................................     8.10     8.21     8.39     8.58     8.77     8.95     9.16
Jefferson........................................    23.63    23.62    23.55    23.33    23.15    22.96    22.74
Oldham...........................................     0.72     0.73     0.75     0.76     0.78     0.79     0.81
                                                  --------------------------------------------------------------
    Point Subtotal...............................    32.45    32.56    32.69    32.67    32.70    32.70    32.71
                       Area
Bullitt..........................................     3.34     3.43     3.60     3.75     3.92     4.09     4.26
Jefferson........................................    17.33    17.41    17.51    17.59    17.67    17.76    17.85
Oldham...........................................     2.46     2.55     2.70     2.82     3.01     3.16     3.32
                                                  --------------------------------------------------------------
    Area Subtotal................................    23.13    23.39    23.81    24.16    24.60    25.01    25.43
 
                     Mobile*
Bullitt..........................................     3.74     3.43     2.87     2.52     2.30     2.18     2.05
Jefferson........................................    25.34    23.04    19.22    15.49    12.24    10.52     9.52
Oldham...........................................     2.29     2.16     1.79     1.56     1.45     1.40     1.34
                                                  --------------------------------------------------------------
    Mobile Subtotal..............................    31.37    28.63    23.88    19.57    15.99    14.10    12.91
 
                     Nonroad
Bullitt..........................................     1.77     1.91     1.91     1.82     1.69     1.49     1.36
Jefferson........................................    14.31    13.14    11.50    10.62    10.41    10.45    10.64
Oldham...........................................     1.54     1.38     1.18     1.08     1.06     1.06     1.08
                                                  --------------------------------------------------------------
    Nonroad Total................................    17.62    16.43    14.59    13.52    13.16    13.00    13.08
                                                  --------------------------------------------------------------
        Total....................................   104.57   101.01    94.97    89.92    86.45    84.81    84.13
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


             Table 3.--Actual and Projected NOX Emissions for Bullitt, Jefferson and Oldham Counties
                                                 [Tons per day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Categories                       2003     2005     2008     2011     2014     2017     2020
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Point
Bullitt..........................................     0.60     0.61     0.64     0.65     0.68     0.71     0.72
Jefferson........................................    74.48    53.95    53.63    50.91    51.76    51.24    46.49
Oldham...........................................     0.09     0.09     0.09     0.10     0.10     0.10     0.10
                                                  --------------------------------------------------------------
    Point Subtotal...............................    75.47    54.65    54.36    51.66    52.54    52.05    47.31
 
                       Area
Bullitt..........................................     0.11     0.11     0.12     0.12     0.13     0.13     0.14
Jefferson........................................     0.75     0.76     0.76     0.76     0.76     0.76     0.76
Oldham...........................................     0.07     0.07     0.07     0.08     0.09     0.09     0.09
                                                  --------------------------------------------------------------
 
    Area Subtotal................................     0.93     0.94     0.95     0.96     0.98     0.98     0.99
                     Mobile*
Bullitt..........................................     7.52     7.23     5.99     4.83     3.84     3.17     2.73
Jefferson........................................    63.29    54.96    41.55    29.62    19.76    13.87    11.02

[[Page 20974]]

 
Oldham...........................................     4.43     4.36     3.58     2.88     2.34     1.96     1.72
                                                  --------------------------------------------------------------
    Mobile Subtotal..............................    75.24    66.55    51.12    37.33    25.94    19.00    15.47
 
                     Nonroad
Bullitt..........................................     1.81     1.78     1.70     1.60     1.47     1.35     1.27
Jefferson........................................    31.94    31.11    29.36    27.37    25.26    23.44    22.17
Oldham...........................................     1.63     1.59     1.49     1.37     1.22     1.07     0.95
                                                  --------------------------------------------------------------
    Nonroad Total................................    35.38    34.48    32.55    30.34    27.95    25.86    24.39
                                                  --------------------------------------------------------------
        Total....................................   187.02   156.62   138.98   120.29   107.41    97.89    88.16
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Table 4.--Attainment Year and End-Year VOC Emissions for Bi-State
                      Louisville 8-Hour Ozone Area
                            [Tons per day] *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    2003         2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kentucky......................................       104.57        84.13
Indiana.......................................        29.26     ** 27.91
                                               -------------------------
    Total.....................................       133.83       112.04
                                               =========================
Safety Margin.................................          n/a       21.79
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Emissions inventories, as provided by Kentucky, for this table and
  Table 2 may be slightly different due to rounding conventions.
** This total reflects the VOC emissions for Indiana as submitted in the
  Indiana SIP and is an update to the total of 27.65 as provided in the
  Kentucky submittal.


    Table 5.--Attainment Year and End-Year NOX Emissions for Bi-State
                      Louisville 8-Hour Ozone Area
                            [Tons per day] *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    2003         2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kentucky......................................       187.02        88.16
Indiana.......................................        51.77     ** 38.10
                                               -------------------------
    Total.....................................       238.79       126.26
                                               =========================
Safety Margin.................................          n/a      112.53
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Emissions inventories, as provided by Kentucky, for this table and
  Table 3 may be slightly different due to rounding conventions.
** This total reflects the NOX emissions for Indiana as submitted in the
  Indiana SIP and is an update to the total of 38.11 as provided in the
  Kentucky submittal.

    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 area. The attainment level of emissions 
is the level of emissions during one of the years in which the area met 
the NAAQS. Kentucky and Indiana have collectively decided to allocate a 
portion of the available safety margin to the regional 2020 MVEBs for 
VOC and NOX. This allocation and the remaining available 
safety margin for this bi-State area are discussed further in section 
VII of this rulemaking.
d. Monitoring Network
    There are currently seven monitors measuring ozone in the entire 
bi-State Louisville 8-hour ozone area--two in Indiana and five in 
Kentucky. KDAQ has committed in the maintenance plan to continue 
operation of the Kentucky monitors in compliance with 40 CFR part 58, 
and has addressed the requirement for monitoring. Indiana has provided 
a similar commitment for the monitors in Clark and Floyd Counties.
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
    Kentucky has the legal authority to enforce and implement the 
requirements of the ozone maintenance plan for the Kentucky Bi-State 
Louisville Area. This includes the authority to adopt, implement and 
enforce any subsequent emissions control contingency measures 
determined to be necessary to correct future ozone attainment problems.
    Kentucky will track the progress of the maintenance plan by 
performing future reviews of actual emissions for the area using the 
latest emissions factors, models and methodologies. For these periodic 
inventories Kentucky will review the assumptions made for the purpose 
of the maintenance demonstration concerning projected growth of 
activity levels. If any of these assumptions appear to have changed 
substantially, Kentucky will re-project emissions. Following the 
redesignation of the area, sources are prohibited from reducing 
emission controls already in place when attainment is achieved unless 
EPA approves a SIP revision consistent with section 110 of the CAA.
    Kentucky and EPA have instituted the following programs that will 
remain enforceable and are included as part of Kentucky's September 
2006 SIP submittal, to maintain air quality which meets the NAAQS for 
the 8-hour ozone standard.
     All new major VOC or NOX sources locating in 
Kentucky shall, as a minimum, apply control procedures that are 
reasonable, available, and practical;
     All major modifications to existing major VOC or 
NOX sources are subject to RACT requirements as well as the 
best available control technology (BACT) requirement of the KDAQ and 
Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control District (LMAPCD) PSD 
regulations;
     All new affected facilities with the potential to emit 
more than 5 tons per year of VOC are required to comply with the 
Jefferson County Air Pollution Control Commission Regulation Number 7 
regarding emissions of VOCs;
     Continuation of the rule effectiveness programs to enhance 
inspection of stationary sources to ensure emission control equipment 
is functioning properly and compliance is maintained (Jefferson 
County);
     Stage I vapor recovery in former 1-hour maintenance 
portions of Bullitt and Oldham counties;
     Stage II vapor recovery (Jefferson County);
     Federal Motor Vehicle Control Standards;
     Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control District (LMAPCD) 
Amended Board Order with the Kosmos Cement Company to comply with an 
allowed emission rate for the cement kiln that is more stringent than 
the previous Kentucky SIP NOX RACT limit;
     Reformulated Gasoline Phase II in effect in Jefferson 
County and the former 1-Hour Maintenance portions of Bullitt and Oldham 
counties since January 1, 2000;
     Transportation conformity requirements;
     PSD requirements;
     Federal controls on certain nonroad engines (e.g. diesel 
and other Federal requirements, industrial diesel equipment, 
locomotives) after 2000;

[[Page 20975]]

     Federal controls on the VOC content for architectural and 
maintenance paints, auto body shops and consumer products;
     The Kentucky open burning rule to further limit types of 
burning in the former 1-hour Maintenance portions of Bullitt and Oldham 
Counties.
    In addition to these measures, Kentucky explains in its submittal 
that further reductions will be achieved through the continued 
implementation of new Federal regulations to further control the 
emissions of hazardous air pollutants that are VOCs (40 CFR part 63--
NESHAPS).
f. Contingency Plan
    The contingency plan provisions of the maintenance plan are 
designed to promptly correct a violation of the NAAQS that occurs after 
redesignation to attainment. Section 175A of the CAA requires that a 
maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems 
necessary to assure that a State will promptly correct a violation of 
the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The maintenance plan should 
identify the contingency measures to be adopted, a schedule and 
procedure for adoption and implementation, and a time limit for action 
by the State. A State should also identify specific indicators to be 
used to determine when the contingency measures need to be implemented. 
The maintenance plan must include a requirement that a State will 
implement all measures with respect to control of the pollutant that 
were contained in the SIP before redesignation of the area to 
attainment in accordance with section 175A(d). This requirement is met 
because all SIP measures are retained for maintenance. Kentucky's 
submittal satisfies all the contingency plan requirements described in 
section 175A of the CAA.
    In its September 29, 2006, SIP submittal, Kentucky affirms that a 
combination of all programs already instituted by Kentucky and EPA have 
resulted in cleaner air in the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area and 
the anticipated future benefits from these programs are expected to 
result in continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in this area. 
Sources are prohibited from terminating emissions controls following 
the redesignation of the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area unless EPA 
approves a SIP revision consistent with section 110 of the CAA. The 
contingency plan includes tracking and triggering mechanisms to 
determine when contingency measures are needed and a process of 
developing and adopting appropriate control measures. The triggers of 
the contingency plan are (1) If a measured design value of the fourth 
highest maximum at any monitor within the maintenance area in a single 
ozone season is .087 ppm or greater, or (2) if periodic emission 
inventory updates reveal excessive or unanticipated growth greater than 
10 percent in ozone precursor emissions. If either of these two 
triggers are met, Kentucky will evaluate existing control measures to 
determine if any further emission reduction measures should be 
implemented at that time. If there is a measured violation of the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS in the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area, Kentucky, or 
as appropriate, LMAPCD, commits to consider for adoption one or more of 
the following measures within nine months. All regulatory programs 
adopted will be implemented within 18 months from a measured violation.
     A program to require additional emission reductions on 
stationary sources;
     A program to enhance inspection of stationary sources to 
ensure emission control equipment is functioning properly;
     Fuel programs \2\ including incentives for alternative 
fuels;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Generally, states are preempted from adopting fuel controls 
pursuant to section 211(c)(4)(A) of the CAA unless EPA grants a fuel 
waiver in accordance with section 211(c)(4)(C) of the CAA. 
Specifically, section 211(c)(4)(A) of the CAA states that: ``Except 
as otherwise provided in [the CAA], no State (or political 
subdivision thereof) may prescribe or attempt to enforce, for 
purposes of motor vehicle emission control, any control or 
prohibition respecting any characteristic or component of a fuel or 
fuel additive in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine * * * '' 
Thus, any SIP-approved fuel program can only be approved if a 
section 211(c)(4)(C) waiver is granted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Restriction of certain roads or lanes to, or construction 
of such roads or lanes for use by, passenger buses or high occupancy 
vehicles;
     Trip-reduction ordinances;
     Employer-based transportation management plans, including 
incentives;
     Programs to limit or restrict vehicle use in downtown 
areas, or other areas of emission concentration particularly during 
periods of peak use;
     Programs for new construction and major reconstructions of 
paths or tracks for use by pedestrians or by non-motorized vehicles 
when economically feasible and in the public interest; and
     LMAPCD vehicle inspection/maintenance (I/M) program.
    The following milestones are applicable to all contingency measures 
and are calculated from the date upon which Kentucky is notified of a 
violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS:
     Proposal of draft regulations and promulgation of final 
regulations--3 months;
     Issuance of final specifications and procedures--3 months;
     Issuance of final request for proposals (if applicable)--4 
months; and
     Licensing or certifications of stations and inspectors--17 
months.
    EPA has concluded that the maintenance plan adequately addresses 
the five basic components of a maintenance plan: attainment inventory, 
maintenance demonstration, monitoring network, verification of 
continued attainment, and a contingency plan. The maintenance plan SIP 
revision submitted by Kentucky for Bullitt, Jefferson and Oldham 
Counties therefore meets the requirements of section 175A of the CAA 
and is approvable.

VII. What Are the Proposed Regional MVEBs for the Bi-State Louisville 
8-Hour Ozone Area?

    Under the CAA, States are required to submit, at various times, 
control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone areas. These 
control strategy SIPs (e.g., reasonable further progress SIPs and 
attainment demonstration SIPs) and maintenance plans establish MVEBs 
for criteria pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution 
from cars and trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, an MVEB is established for 
the last year of the maintenance plan. A State may adopt MVEBs for 
other years as well. Additionally, in coordination with cooperating 
States in a multi-State area, such States may adopt regional MVEBs that 
include another State. The MVEB is the portion of the total allowable 
emissions in the maintenance demonstration that is allocated to highway 
and transit vehicle use and emissions. See, 40 CFR 93.101. The MVEB 
serves as a ceiling on emissions from an area's planned transportation 
system. The MVEB concept is further explained in the preamble to the 
November 24, 1993, transportation conformity rule (58 FR 62188). The 
preamble also describes how to establish the MVEB in the SIP and revise 
the MVEB. In addition to MVEBs for the last year of the maintenance 
plan, a State may adopt MVEBs for other years as well.
    Kentucky and Indiana developed regional MVEBs for NOX 
and VOCs. Kentucky used the year 2020, the last year of its maintenance 
plan, and an additional year, 2003. Kentucky's maintenance plan being 
proposed for approval today includes the regional MVEBs for 
NOX and VOCs developed jointly by Kentucky and Indiana. EPA 
is

[[Page 20976]]

now proposing to approve the regional MVEBs.
    Kentucky's September 29, 2006, SIP submittal included a maintenance 
plan with regional MVEBs for NOX and VOCs for the entire bi-
State Louisville 8-hour ozone area for the years 2003 and 2020. As part 
of its rulemaking process, Kentucky presented the regional MVEBs (for 
2020) for public comment on the State level, however, the additional 
2003 year was not included in that public comment process. The 2003 
mobile emissions projections (the partial basis of the 2003 MVEBs) 
were, however, included in Kentucky's June 7, 2006, initial SIP 
submittal that was the subject of public comment. At that time, the 
public had an opportunity to comment on those projections. In its final 
submittal in September 2006, Kentucky included the 2003 MVEBs, and 
addressed the inclusion of the 2003 MVEBs in a response to comments on 
its June 7, 2006, submittal. MVEBs are mandatory for the last year of 
most maintenance plans (2020 for this area), and optional for other 
years (such as 2003 for this Area).
    Kentucky's inclusion of 2003 MVEBs in its final submittal was made 
to provide consistency between the Kentucky and Indiana submittals for 
the regional MVEBs years provided for this entire bi-State area. 
Indiana included the 2003 MVEBs in its request for redesignation of the 
8-hour ozone standard and its maintenance plan SIP revision. The 
interstate-Louisville transportation and air quality partners were 
consulted on the development of the MVEBs for 2003 and 2020, and are in 
agreement with the establishment of MVEBs for 2003 and 2020 for the 
entire bi-State Louisville 8-hour ozone area. In the present 
circumstance, EPA believes that the public had adequate notice and 
opportunity to comment on Kentucky's use of the years 2003 and 2020 for 
the regional MVEBs. The regional MVEBs for the entire bi-State 
Louisville 8-hour ozone area are defined in the table below.

Table 6.--Louisville KY-IN 8-Hour Ozone Regional Motor Vehicle Emissions
                                 Budgets
                             [Tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    2003         2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC...........................................        40.97        22.92
NOX...........................................        95.51        29.46
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Kentucky and Indiana have jointly chosen to allocate a portion of 
the available safety margin to the 2020 MVEBs. This allocation is 6.03 
tpd for VOC and 9.84 tpd for NOX. The 2020 regional MVEBs 
are derived as follows for VOC: (16.89 tpd for total mobile emissions) 
+ (6.03 tpd from available safety margin) = 22.92 tpd; and for 
NOX: (19.62 tpd for total mobile emissions) + (9.84 tpd from 
available safety margin) = 29.46 tpd. Thus, the remaining safety margin 
for the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area is 15.76 tpd for VOC and 
102.69 tpd for NOX.
    Through this rulemaking, EPA is proposing to approve the 2003 and 
2020 regional MVEBs for NOX and VOCs for the bi-State 
Louisville 8-hour ozone area because EPA has determined that the Area 
maintains the 8-hour ozone standard with emissions at the levels of the 
budgets. Once the new MVEBs are approved or found adequate (whichever 
is done first), they must be used for future transportation conformity 
determinations. As is discussed in greater detail below, EPA is also 
notifying the public of EPA's review of the adequacy of the proposed 
2003 and 2020 MVEBs for the Kentucky Bi-State Louisville Area pursuant 
to 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2).

VIII. What Is the Status of EPA's Adequacy Determination for the MVEBs 
for the Bi-State Louisville 8-Hour Ozone Area?

    Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation projects, such 
as the construction of new highways, must ``conform'' to (i.e., be 
consistent with) the part of the State's air quality plan that 
addresses pollution from cars and trucks. ``Conformity'' to the SIP 
means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality 
violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of 
the NAAQS. If a transportation plan does not ``conform,'' most new 
projects that would expand the capacity of roadways cannot go forward. 
Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth EPA policy, criteria, and 
procedures for demonstrating and assuring conformity of such 
transportation activities to a SIP. The regional emissions analysis is 
one, but not the only, requirement for implementing transportation 
conformity. Transportation conformity is a requirement for 
nonattainment and maintenance areas. Maintenance areas are areas that 
were previously nonattainment for a particular NAAQS but have since 
been redesignated to attainment with a maintenance plan for that NAAQS.
    When reviewing submitted ``control strategy'' SIPs or maintenance 
plans containing MVEBs, EPA can make the MVEBs available for use for 
transportation conformity finding these MVEBs ``adequate'' for use in 
determining transportation conformity through EPA's Adequacy Process. 
Once EPA affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB is adequate for 
transportation conformity purposes, that MVEB can be used by State and 
Federal agencies in determining whether proposed transportation 
projects ``conform'' to the SIP as required by section 176(c) of the 
CAA.
    EPA's substantive criteria for determining ``adequacy'' of an MVEB 
are set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e). In accordance with the adequacy 
evaluation process outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2), EPA has the option 
of using a proposed rule to notify the public that EPA is reviewing 
MVEBs for adequacy. Today, EPA is making such a notification that it is 
reviewing the regional MVEBs included as part of Kentucky's 8-hour 
ozone maintenance plan, for adequacy. The public has 30 days in which 
to comment on the adequacy of the regional MVEBs.
    If EPA affirmatively finds the MVEBs adequate prior to approval of 
the maintenance plan and redesignation request, the applicable budgets 
for the purposes of conducting transportation conformity for the 
required regional emissions analysis years that involve the year 2020 
or beyond, will be the 2020 MVEBs for the bi-State Louisville area. For 
required analysis years prior to 2020, the applicable budgets would be 
the 2003 MVEBs. The new regional 2003 and 2020 MVEBs will be available 
on the effective the date of EPA's adequacy finding, or the date of 
publication of the final rulemaking in which the MVEBs are approved 
into the SIP in the Federal Register, whichever is done first.

IX. Proposed Actions on the Redesignation Request and the Maintenance 
Plan SIP Revision Including Proposed Approval of the 2003 and 2020 
MVEBs

    Today, EPA is proposing to determine that the Kentucky Bi-State 
Louisville Area has met the criteria for redesignation from 
nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Further, EPA is 
proposing to approve Kentucky's redesignation request for the Kentucky 
Bi-State Louisville Area. After evaluating Kentucky's SIP submittal 
requesting redesignation, EPA has determined that it meets the 
redesignation criteria set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. 
EPA believes that the redesignation request and monitoring data 
demonstrate that the bi-State Louisville area has attained the 8-hour 
ozone standard.
    EPA is also proposing to approve the September 29, 2006, SIP 
revision

[[Page 20977]]

containing Kentucky's 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for the Kentucky 
Bi-State Louisville Area. The maintenance plan includes regional MVEBs 
for 2003 and 2020, among other requirements.
    Further, as part of today's action, EPA is providing notice that it 
is reviewing the adequacy of the regional MVEBs in accordance with 40 
CFR 93.118(f)(2). Within 24 months from the effective date of EPA's 
adequacy finding for the MVEBs, or the date of publication of the final 
rule for this action, whichever is done first, the transportation 
partners will need to demonstrate conformity to these new MVEBs 
pursuant to 40 CFR 93.104(e) as effectively amended by new section 
172(c)(2)(E) of the CAA as added by the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, 
Efficient Transportation Equity Act--A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), 
which was signed into law on August 10, 2005.

X. 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. Redesignation of an area to attainment under 
section 107(d)(3)(e) of the CAA does not impose any new requirements on 
small entities. Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a 
geographical area and does not impose any new regulatory requirements 
on sources. 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 
(Public Law 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 affects the status of a geographical area, does not impose any 
new requirements on sources, or allow a State to avoid adopting or 
implementing other requirements and does not alter the relationship or 
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA. 
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 and because the Agency does not have reason to believe that 
the rule concerns an environmental health risk or safety risk that may 
disproportionately affect children.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this 
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
Commonwealth 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 CAA. Redesignation is an 
action that affects the status of a geographical area but does not 
impose any new requirements on sources. 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

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks, 
Wilderness areas.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: April 18, 2007.
J.I. Palmer, Jr.,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
 [FR Doc. E7-8114 Filed 4-26-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P