[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 11 (Friday, January 16, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2945-2954]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-944]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R02-OAR-2008-0497, FRL-8763-4]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Jersey 
Reasonable Further Progress Plans, Reasonably Available Control 
Technology, Reasonably Available Control Measures and Conformity 
Budgets

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing action 
on portions of two State Implementation Plan revisions submitted by New 
Jersey that are intended to meet several Clean Air Act (Act) 
requirements for attaining the 0.08 part per million (ppm) 8-hour ozone 
national ambient air quality standards. EPA is proposing approval of: 
The 2008 reasonable further progress plan and associated 2008 ozone 
projection year emission inventories, contingency measures for the 2008 
reasonable further progress plan, 2008 conformity budgets used for 
planning purposes, and the reasonably available control measure 
analysis. In addition, EPA is proposing a conditional approval of New 
Jersey's efforts to meet the reasonably available control technology 
requirement. The intended effect of this action is to approve those 
programs that meet Act requirements and to further achieve emission 
reductions that will be critical to attainment of the national ambient 
air quality standard for ozone in New Jersey's two nonattainment areas.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 17, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket Number EPA-R02-
OAR-2008-0497, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line 
instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: [email protected].
     Fax: 212-637-3901
     Mail: Raymond Werner, Chief, Air Programs Branch, 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th 
Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866.
     Hand Delivery: Raymond Werner, Chief, Air Programs Branch, 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th 
Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866. 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 No. EPA-R02-OAR-2008-
0497. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in 
the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://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 information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://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 http://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 or 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 docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. 
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically 
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region II Office, Air Programs Branch, 290 Broadway, 
25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866. EPA requests, if at all 
possible, that you contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section to view the hard copy of the docket. You 
may view the hard copy of the docket Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4 
p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Raymond Forde ([email protected]) 
concerning emission inventories and reasonable further progress and 
Paul Truchan ([email protected]) concerning other portions of the 
SIP revision, Air Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, 290 
Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866, (212) 637-4249.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What Action Is EPA Proposing?
II. Background Information
    A. What Are the Act Requirements for a Moderate 8-Hr Ozone 
Nonattainment Area?
    1. History and Time Frame for the State's Attainment 
Demonstration SIP
    2. Moderate Area Requirements
III. What Was Included in New Jersey's SIP Submittals?
IV. EPA's Review and Technical Information
    A. Emission Inventories
    1. What Are the Act Requirements?
    2. What Emission Inventories Were Included in the SIP?
    3. What Is EPA's Evaluation?
    B. Reasonable Further Progress Plans
    1. What are the Act Requirements?
    2. What Reasonable Further Progress Plans Were Included in the 
SIP?
    3. What Is EPA's Evaluation?
    C. Contingency Measures
    1. What Are the Act Requirements?
    2. What Contingency Measures Were Included in the SIP?
    3. What Is EPA's Evaluation?
    D. RACT for Stationary Sources
    1. What Are the Act Requirements?
    2. How Did New Jersey Perform Its RACT Analysis?
    3. What Were the Results of New Jersey's Analysis of RACT for 
Stationary Sources?
    4. What Is EPA's Evaluation?

[[Page 2946]]

    E. RACM Analysis
    1. What Are the Act Requirements?
    2. How Did the State Perform the RACM Analysis?
    3. What Were the Results of the RACM Analysis?
    4. What Is EPA's Evaluation?
    F. Conformity Budgets
    1. What Are the Act Requirements?
    2. What Conformity Budgets Were Included in the SIP?
    3. What Is EPA's Evaluation?
V. What Are EPA's Conclusions?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Action Is EPA Proposing?

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has reviewed elements of 
New Jersey's comprehensive State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision for 
the 0.08 ppm 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS 
or standard) \1\ along with other related Clean Air Act (Act) 
requirements necessary to ensure attainment of the standard. The EPA is 
proposing approval of: the 2008 reasonable further progress plan and 
associated 2008 ozone projection emission inventories, contingency 
measures for the 2008 reasonable further progress plan, 2008 conformity 
budgets used for planning purposes, and the reasonably available 
control measure analysis, because the State of New Jersey's Department 
of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) has fully addressed the Act's 
requirements. In addition, while EPA commends New Jersey for its 
excellent effort to meet the reasonably available control technology 
(RACT) requirement, EPA is unable to fully approve the State's RACT SIP 
revision because portions of the submission are deficient. Because the 
State has committed to correct the deficiencies by April 1, 2009, which 
is no more than one year from our anticipated final action on the SIP, 
we are proposing to conditionally approve this component of the SIP 
submittal. At this time, EPA is continuing to review the other 
components of the New Jersey submission and plans to address those 
other components of the SIP submittal in one or more separate proposed 
actions in the near future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Unless otherwise specifically noted in the action, 
references to the 8-hour ozone standard are to the 0.08 ppm ozone 
standard promulgated in 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's analysis and findings are discussed in this proposed 
rulemaking and a more detailed discussion is contained in the Technical 
Support Document for this Proposal which is available on line at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket number EPA-R02-OAR-2008-0497.

II. Background Information

A. What Are the Act Requirements for a Moderate 8-Hr Ozone 
Nonattainment Area?

1. History and Time Frame for the State's Attainment Demonstration SIP
    In 1997, EPA revised the health-based NAAQS for ozone, setting it 
at 0.08 parts per million (ppm) averaged over an 8-hour time frame. EPA 
set the 8-hour ozone standard based on scientific evidence 
demonstrating that ozone causes adverse health effects at lower ozone 
concentrations and over longer periods of time than was understood when 
the pre-existing 1-hour ozone standard was set. EPA determined that the 
8-hour standard would be more protective of human health, especially 
with regard to children and adults who are active outdoors, and 
individuals with a pre-existing respiratory disease, such as asthma.
    On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23951), EPA finalized its attainment/
nonattainment designations for areas across the country with respect to 
the 8-hour ozone standard. These actions became effective on June 15, 
2004. The entire state of New Jersey is located in two multi-state 8-
hour ozone moderate nonattainment areas, the New York-Northern New 
Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT nonattainment area, and the Philadelphia-
Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE nonattainment area. The New 
Jersey portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-
CT nonattainment area consists of the following New Jersey counties: 
Bergen, Essex, Hudson, Hunterdon, Middlesex, Morris, Monmouth, Passaic, 
Somerset, Sussex, Union and Warren and will be referred to as the 
Northern New Jersey Counties. The New Jersey portion of the 
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE nonattainment area 
consists of the following New Jersey counties: Atlantic, Burlington, 
Camden, Cape May, Cumberland, Gloucester, Ocean, Mercer and Salem and 
will be referred to as the Southern New Jersey Counties.
    These designations triggered the Act's requirements under section 
182(b) for moderate nonattainment areas, including a requirement to 
submit an attainment demonstration. EPA's Phase 1 8-hour ozone 
implementation rule, published on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23951) (Phase 1 
Rule) specifies that states must submit attainment demonstrations for 
their nonattainment areas to the EPA by no later than three years from 
the effective date of designation, that is, by June 15, 2007.
2. Moderate Area Requirements
    On November 9, 2005, EPA published Phase 2 of the 8-hour ozone 
implementation rule (70 FR 71612) (Phase 2 Rule) in which it addresses 
the control obligations that apply to areas designated nonattainment 
for the 8-hour NAAQS. Among other things, the Phase 1 and Phase 2 Rules 
outline the SIP requirements and deadlines for various requirements in 
areas designated as moderate nonattainment. For such areas, reasonably 
available control technology plans were due by September 2006 (40 CFR 
51.912(a)(2)). The rules further require that modeling and attainment 
demonstrations, reasonable further progress plans, reasonably available 
control measures, projection year emission inventories, motor vehicle 
emissions budgets and contingency measures were all due by June 15, 
2007 (40 CFR 51.908(a), and (c)).

III. What Was Included in New Jersey's SIP Submittals?

    After completing the appropriate public notice and comment 
procedures, New Jersey made a series of submittals in order to address 
the Act's 8-hour ozone attainment requirements described in Section 
II.A.2. On August 1, 2007, New Jersey submitted its RACT rules, which 
included a determination that many of the RACT rules currently 
contained in its SIP meet the RACT obligation for the 8-hour standard, 
and also included commitments to adopt revisions to several regulations 
where the State identified more stringent emission limitations that it 
believed should now be considered RACT. On October 29, 2007, New Jersey 
submitted a comprehensive 8-hour ozone SIP for the New Jersey portions 
of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT and the 
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE nonattainment areas. 
It included attainment demonstrations, reasonable further progress 
(RFP) plans for 2008 and 2009, reasonably available control measures 
analyses for both areas, contingency measures, on-road motor vehicle 
emission budgets, and general conformity emission budgets for McGuire 
Air Force Base and Lakehurst Naval Air Station. These SIP revisions 
were subject to notice and comment by the public and the State 
addressed the comments received on the proposed SIPs before adopting 
the plans and submitting them for EPA review and approval into the SIP. 
Finally, as part of the RACT evaluation, on December 14, 2007, New 
Jersey submitted to EPA an assessment of how it planned to address

[[Page 2947]]

EPA's recently revised Control Technique Guidelines (CTGs).

IV. EPA's Review and Technical Information

A. Emission Inventories

1. What Are the Act Requirements?
    An emissions inventory is a comprehensive, accurate, current 
inventory of actual emissions from all sources and is required by 
section 172(c)(3) of the Act. For ozone nonattainment areas, the 
emissions inventory must contain volatile organic compounds (VOC) and 
nitrogen oxides (NOX) emissions because these pollutants are 
precursors to ozone formation.
2. What Emission Inventories Were Included in the SIP?
a. 2002 Base Year
    New Jersey submitted its proposed 2002 Base Year emission 
inventories on February 21, 2006 and final 2002 Base Year emission 
inventories on May 18, 2006. EPA proposed to approve New Jersey's 2002 
Base Year inventories on May 9, 2006 (71 FR 26895) and approved the 
emission inventories on July 10, 2006 (71 FR 38770). The reader is 
referred to these rulemakings for additional information concerning the 
emission inventories and EPA's approval. A summary of the 2002 base 
year emission inventory is included in Tables 1 and 2 of this action.
b. Projection Years
    The 2002 VOC and NOX anthropogenic emissions are 
projected to 2008 and 2009 in order to determine the VOC and 
NOX reductions needed for the rate of progress plans and for 
the attainment demonstrations. The 2008 and 2009 projection year 
emission inventories are calculated by adjusting the 2002 base year 
inventory using factors that estimate growth from 2002 to 2008 and 
2009. EPA requires specific growth factors be considered for each 
source type in the inventory since sources typically change at 
different rates. The 2008 and 2009 inventories were also adjusted by 
the State to reflect the benefits of control measures that were adopted 
since the 2002 emission inventory and those that are expected to be 
adopted. Tables 1 and 2 show 2008 and 2009 VOC and NOX 
projection emission inventories after applying the appropriate growth 
indicators/methodologies to the 2002 base year emission inventory for 
New Jersey's portion of each ozone nonattainment area and to the 
expected controls.

                        Table 1--Northern New Jersey Counties 2002 Base Year, 2008 and 2009 Projection Year Emission Inventories
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Ozone season VOC and NOX emissions  (in tons/day)
                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     2002 Base year actual inventory   2008 Projection year inventory    2009 Projection year inventory
                                                   ----------------------------------            controlled                        controlled
                                                                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          VOC              NOX              VOC              NOX              VOC              NOX
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point.............................................             68.2            152.7             50.5             51.3             48.9             53.8
Area..............................................            243.5             24.4            218.7             21.8            210.8             22
Non-Road Mobile...................................            121.6            161               87.9            120.9             82.2            117.2
On-Road Mobile....................................            183              378.9             85.3            143.6             79              133.5
                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.........................................            616.3            717              442.4            337.6            420.9            326.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                        Table 2--Southern New Jersey Counties 2002 Base Year, 2008 and 2009 Projection Year Emission Inventories
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                               Ozone season VOC and NOX emissions  (in tons/day)
                                                      --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       2002 Base year actual inventory   2008 Projection year inventory   2009 Projection year inventory
                                                      ---------------------------------            controlled                       controlled
                                                                                       -----------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             VOC              NOX             VOC              NOX             VOC              NOX
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point................................................             45.4           127.7             28             17.5              26             25.9
Area.................................................            126.4            11.5            114.8           10.5             110.3           10.6
Non-Road Mobile......................................             99              70.6             80.1           63.18             76.2           62.13
On-Road Mobile.......................................             91.8           179.8             48.8          111.3              45.4          105.9
                                                      --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total............................................            362.6           389.6            271.7          202.48            257.9          204.53
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. What Is EPA's Evaluation?
    Based on EPA review, the 2008 and 2009 inventories are determined 
to be complete and consistent with EPA guidance. A more detailed 
discussion of how the emission inventories were reviewed and the 
results of these reviews is provided in the Technical Support Document 
for this action. Since the 2009 emission inventory is an integral part 
of the attainment demonstration which EPA is not acting on at this 
time, EPA is deferring action on the 2009 emission inventory. EPA will 
act on the 2009 projection year emission inventory when it acts on the 
attainment demonstration. EPA is proposing to approve the 2008 
projection year emission inventories as the State used them in 
developing the RFP Plans.

B. Reasonable Further Progress Plans

1. What Are the Act Requirements?
    Section 182(b)(1) of the Act and EPA's 8-hour ozone implementation 
rule (40 CFR 51.910) require each 8-hour ozone

[[Page 2948]]

nonattainment area designated moderate and above to submit an emissions 
inventory and RFP Plan, for review and approval into its SIP, that 
describes how the area will achieve actual emissions reductions of VOC 
and NOX from a baseline emissions inventory.
    The process for determining the emissions baseline from which the 
RFP reductions are calculated is described in section 182(b)(1) of the 
Act and 40 CFR 51.910. This baseline value has been determined to be 
the 2002 adjusted base year inventory. Sections 182(b)(1)(B) and (D) 
require the exclusion from the base year inventory of emissions 
benefits resulting from the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program 
(FMVCP) regulations promulgated by January 1, 1990, and the Reid Vapor 
Pressure (RVP) regulations promulgated June 11, 1990 (55 FR 23666). The 
FMVCP and RVP emissions reductions are determined by the State using 
EPA's on-road mobile source emissions modeling software, MOBILE6. The 
FMVCP and RVP emission reductions are then removed from the base year 
inventory by the State, resulting in an adjusted base year inventory. 
The emission reductions needed to satisfy the RFP requirement are then 
calculated from the adjusted base year inventory. These reductions are 
then subtracted from the adjusted base year inventory to establish the 
emissions target for the RFP milestone year (2008).
    For moderate areas like New Jersey's, the Act specifies a 15 
percent reduction in ozone precursor emissions over an initial six year 
period. In the Phase 2 Rule, EPA interpreted this requirement for areas 
that were also designated nonattainment and classified as moderate or 
higher for the 1-hour ozone standard. In the Phase 2 Rule, EPA provided 
that an area classified as moderate or higher that has the same 
boundaries as an area, or is entirely composed of several areas or 
portions of areas, for which EPA fully approved a 15 percent plan for 
the 1-hour NAAQS, is considered to have met the requirements of section 
182(b)(1) of the Act for the 8-hour NAAQS. In this situation, a 
moderate nonattainment area is subject to RFP under section 172(c)(2) 
of the Act and shall submit, no later than 3 years after designation 
for the 8-hour NAAQS, a SIP revision that meets the requirements of 40 
CFR 51.910(b)(2). The RFP SIP must provide for a 15 percent emission 
reduction (either NOX and/or VOC) accounting for any growth 
that occurs during the six year period following the baseline emissions 
inventory year, that is, 2002-2008. The section 182 and 172 
requirements differ in that section 182(b)(1) specifies that it must be 
a 15 percent VOC reduction where section 172(c)(2) provides that the 15 
percent reduction can be either a VOC and/or NOX reduction.
2. What Reasonable Further Progress Plans Were Included in the SIP?
    New Jersey followed EPA's requirements and guidance in calculating 
the ``adjusted baseline inventory,'' 2008 target level emissions and 
the RFP emission reductions. The total emission reductions required to 
meet the 2008 target level in the Northern and Southern New Jersey 
Counties are 96.65 tons per day (tpd) and 59.96 tpd, respectively. New 
Jersey's RFP Plans for the Northern and Southern New Jersey Counties 
are summarized in Table 3. Based on Table 3, New Jersey's VOC control 
plan for the Northern and Southern New Jersey Counties meets the 15 
percent reduction requirements and, in addition, results in a 70.15 tpd 
reduction surplus in the Northern New Jersey Counties and a 30.64 tpd 
reduction surplus in the Southern New Jersey Counties.

     Table 3--VOC Measures Included in the New Jersey 2008 RFP Plan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Northern NJ        Southern NJ
       VOC control measures           counties (tons     counties (tons
                                         per day)           per day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Required Reduction In VOC To Meet               96.65              59.96
 2008 Milestone...................
Non-Road Mobile Source:
    Portable Fuel Containers 2005.               1                   .4
    Non-road Mobile Federal                     45                 24.3
     Control Measures.............
On-Road Mobile Source:
    Stage II (Gasoline Transfer                  1.3                 .8
     Operations)..................
    Onboard Diagnostic (OBD) I/M..               2.9                1.6
                                   -------------------------------------
        Total Federal Control                   82.5               48.0
         Measures Benefits In
         Mobile Model.............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary Area Source:
    Autobody (Mobile Equipment                   1.5                 .5
     Repair and Refinishing)......
    Solvent Cleaning (Degreasing).               2.4                 .8
    Consumer Products 2005........               3.6                0
    Portable Fuel Containers (2005               2.6                0.6
     and 2009)....................
    Stage I (Gasoline Transfer                   5.9                2.9
     Operations-Balanced Submerged
     Filling).....................
                                   -------------------------------------
        Total VOC Benefits From                148.7               79.9
         All Sources..............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Reduction Surplus.........              52.05              19.94
------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. What Is EPA's Evaluation?
    New Jersey determined the required emission reductions for its RFP 
plan consistent with the Act, as interpreted in EPA's regulations, 
guidance and policies. All the measures included in the New Jersey RFP 
Plans have been adopted. New Jersey also generated a significant amount 
of NOX reductions that could be used for RFP. The emission 
reduction benefits from certain measures have been divided between the 
RFP and the contingency measure requirements, but are not being double 
counted. Even without these measures, the RFP plans contain sufficient 
emission reductions to satisfy the RFP requirement, therefore EPA is 
proposing to approve the RFP Plans.

C. Contingency Measures

1. What Are the Act Requirements?
    For ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above, 
states must include in their submittal contingency measures to be

[[Page 2949]]

implemented if the area fails to make RFP or to attain the NAAQS by the 
applicable attainment date (sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9)). 
Contingency measures are additional controls to be implemented in the 
event the area fails to meet an RFP or attainment milestone. They are 
intended to achieve reductions over and beyond those relied on in the 
RFP and attainment demonstrations. The Act does not preclude a state 
from implementing such measures before they are triggered. EPA 
interprets the Act to require sufficient contingency measures in the 
submittal, so that upon implementation of such measures, additional 
emissions reductions of up to three percent of the adjusted base year 
inventory (or a lesser percentage that will make up for the identified 
shortfall) would be achieved in the year after the failure has been 
identified. For more information on contingency measures please see the 
April 16, 1992 General Preamble (57 FR 13512) and the November 29, 2005 
Phase 2 8-hour ozone implementation rule (70 FR 71612).
2. What Contingency Measures Were Included in the SIP?
    The New Jersey SIP includes the control measures that will provide 
additional emission reductions should the State not achieve the 15 
percent RFP target in 2008 and/or attainment in 2010. The 2010 
contingency measures are not included in the attainment demonstration, 
but since EPA is not acting on the attainment demonstration in this 
action, EPA is deferring action on the contingency measures for 
attainment. EPA will act on these measures when it acts on the 
attainment demonstration.
    Based on the 3 percent reduction needed for RFP contingency, and 
using only VOC emission reductions in 2008, New Jersey calculated it 
would need 18.1 tpd of VOC emission reduction in the Northern New 
Jersey Counties and 10.7 tpd of VOC emission reduction in the Southern 
New Jersey Counties should New Jersey fail to meet RFP. The measures 
and associated emission reductions are identified in Table 4 and the 
emission reductions are not relied on in the RFP or in the attainment 
demonstration.

   Table 4--VOC Reductions for Reasonable Further Progress Contingency
                            Measures for 2008
                       [Ozone season tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            VOC (TPD)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Northern New Jersey Counties
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency Requirement: 3 percent VOC.................             18.1
Control Measures:
    Architectural Coatings 2005........................             15
    Consumer Products 2005.............................              3.1
    Reductions allocated to RFP contingency............             18.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Southern New Jersey Counties
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency Requirement: 3 percent VOC.................             10.7
Control Measures:
    Architectural Coatings 2005........................              7
    Consumer Products 2005.............................              3
    Portable Fuel Containers 2005 and 2009.............              0.7
    Reductions allocated to RFP contingency............             10.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. What Is EPA's Evaluation?
    New Jersey determined the required emission reductions for its RFP 
contingency plans consistent with the Act, as interpreted in EPA's 
regulations, guidance and policies and identified the specific measures 
needed to achieve them. All the emission reductions included in the RFP 
contingency plans are from adopted measures. EPA is proposing to 
approve the State's RFP contingency plans.

D. RACT for Stationary Sources

1. What Are the Act Requirements?
    Sections 172(c)(1), 182(b)(2) and 182(f) of the Act require 
nonattainment areas that are designated as moderate or above for ozone 
to adopt RACT. All of New Jersey is subject to this requirement since 
all counties in the State are located in either of two nonattainment 
areas that are classified as moderate ozone nonattainment areas for the 
8-hour NAAQS for ozone (40 CFR 81.331). In accordance with section 
182(b), New Jersey must, at a minimum, adopt RACT level controls for 
sources covered by a Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document and 
for any major non-CTG sources.
    Section IV.G of EPA's Phase 2 Rule discusses the RACT requirements. 
It states, in part, that where a RACT SIP is required, SIPs 
implementing the 8-hour standard generally must assure that RACT is 
met, either through a certification that previously required RACT 
controls represent RACT for 8-hour implementation purposes or, where 
necessary, through a new RACT determination. The majority of counties 
in New Jersey were previously classified under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS 
as severe, while the remaining counties were subject to RACT as part of 
the Ozone Transport Region. New Jersey chose a uniform applicability 
level for RACT based on the severe classification which resulted in a 
statewide requirement for major sources to be defined as those having 
emissions of 25 tons per year or more for both VOC and NOX. 
In areas classified as moderate, the definition for major sources in 
New Jersey would have been 50 tons per year for VOC and 100 tons per 
year for NOX. However, New Jersey chose to retain the 
original 1-hour ozone limits statewide in New Jersey for purposes of 
the RACT analysis resulting in a more stringent evaluation of RACT. New 
Jersey's use of 25 tons per year for RACT is consistent with court 
decision concerning anti-backsliding. See South Coast Air Quality 
Management Dist. (SCAQMD) v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006).
2. How Did New Jersey Perform Its RACT Analysis?
    New Jersey combined the results of three separate information 
gathering efforts from industry, environmental groups and the general 
public in order

[[Page 2950]]

to get the greatest input on the stringency of the existing 
requirements and the possibility of new RACT controls. The first effort 
was the exchange of information and experience through a public forum 
entitled, ``Reducing Air Pollution Together'' (a multi-pollutant 
effort), the second was through state participation in regional control 
development efforts, and the third was an internal NJDEP assessment of 
RACT controls. The internal assessment also included a review of EPA's 
56 CTGs and Alternative Control Techniques (ACTs) where the CTG's and 
ACT's level of control and applicability were compared to New Jersey's 
regulations. The results of these three efforts were consolidated and 
presented to the NJDEP Air Quality Management team for its 
consideration. The Air Quality Management team then discussed and 
prioritized the recommendations resulting in a list of approximately 60 
potential control measures for further evaluation. The NJDEP's 
engineers and scientists were assigned the task of further 
investigating and writing white papers for each potential control 
measure. Each control measure was evaluated based on information 
collected regarding emission benefits, implementation issues, cost-
effectiveness, and existing controls.
    The white papers were then made available to the public for its 
review and comment and the evaluated control measures were added to the 
other recommended control measures for further evaluation. New Jersey's 
RACT evaluation, ``Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for 
the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) and 
other Associated State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revisions for the Fine 
Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS), 
Regional Haze, and the Clean Air Act Requirements on Transport of Air 
Pollution'' dated August 1, 2007, addressed approximately 115 source 
categories covering multiple pollutants, as well as New Jersey's 
commitments to adopt more stringent controls for the 8-hour ozone, 
PM2.5 and Regional Haze SIPs and was the subject of a public hearing.
3. What Were the Results of New Jersey's Analysis of RACT for 
Stationary Sources?
a. CTGs and ACTs
    New Jersey has implemented RACT controls statewide for the 56 CTGs 
and ACTs that EPA has issued to meet the requirements of the Act. These 
RACT controls were promulgated in the New Jersey Administrative Code, 
Title 7: Chapter 27, Air Pollution Control in:

--Subchapter 16, ``Control and Prohibition of Air Pollution by Volatile 
Organic Compounds,''
--Subchapter 19, ``Control and Prohibition of Air Pollution from Oxides 
of Nitrogen,'' and
--Subchapter 23, ``Prevention of Air Pollution From Architectural 
Coatings.''

    The New Jersey RACT SIP contains a table (see Table 4--RACT 
Determinations Based on Existing USEPA Guidance) listing all the CTG 
and ACT categories (56 categories in total) and the corresponding 
Subchapter and section which address the requirements. These have all 
been approved by EPA and made part of the SIP.
    For many source categories, the existing New Jersey rules go beyond 
the recommendations contained in the CTG/ACT documents in terms of more 
stringent emission rates and lower thresholds of applicability. New 
Jersey identified several categories where controls may be more 
stringent and these are included in Section D.3.d. below. Based on the 
August 1, 2007 RACT evaluation, New Jersey's existing RACT rules for 
the remaining CTG and ACT categories met the RACT requirement for the 
8-hour ozone NAAQS implementation purposes.
b. Negative Declaration
    By comparing the sources covered in the existing CTGs and ACTs with 
New Jersey's adopted rules, and searching the New Jersey Environmental 
Management System permitting and emission inventory databases, and 
emission statements for source categories by Standard Industrial Code 
(SIC), New Jersey determined that for the following CTGs and ACTs, 
either no sources exist in New Jersey, or the sources fall below the 
CTG/ACT applicability thresholds:
    (1) Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks;
    (2) Manufacture of Vegetable Oils;
    (3) Manufacture of Pneumatic Rubber Tires;
    (4) Aerospace Coatings;
    (5) Iron and Steel Mills;
    (6) Cement Manufacturing;
    (7) Nitric and Adipic Manufacturing Plants;
    (8) Flat Wood Paneling Coatings; and
    (9) Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Operations.
    New Jersey will review all new CTGs issued by EPA since the 
preparation of this SIP revision and adopt provisions to address any 
new requirements for those categories for which sources exist in the 
State. This includes those covered by the present negative declaration.
c. Facility-Specific Emission Limits and Alternative Emission Limits
    The requirement to review and update 1-hour ozone RACT SIP limits 
also applies to any uniquely determined RACT limits for major 
stationary sources that are located in nonattainment areas. In New 
Jersey, uniquely determined RACT limits may result from two situations: 
Where major sources are not regulated by a CTG but are still required 
to have controls based on its size and on a requirement to perform a 
case-by-case determination (facility specific emission limit (FSEL)), 
or where the facility could not reasonably meet the RACT limit because 
of site specific factors and applied for an alternative emission limit 
(AEL). In both cases the limits are adopted by the State and approved 
into the SIP.
    As part of the 8-hr ozone RACT determination, New Jersey is 
including new source categories required to have RACT and tightening 
emission limits for some source categories that would be applicable to 
all sources, including some which had a FSEL or AEL. At the same time, 
New Jersey is requiring all facilities that were previously granted 
FSELs or AELs to now comply with the new emission requirements were 
applicable, or obtain a new FSEL if the source category still has no 
specific RACT limits in the rule. Should any facility not be able to 
meet the new rule requirements, it could apply for a new AEL that would 
be based on the facilities abilities to comply with current technology 
and the present cost of those controls.
d. Source Categories Identified for Further Control
    The results of NJDEP's assessment of RACT for the CTG and ACT 
categories, non-CTG major sources regulated by the State, as well as 
categories identified by the regional and local workgroups are 
identified in Table 5. Table 5 lists the RACT source categories for 
which the State will propose new or revised emission standards along 
with the targeted pollutants and affected rules and categories which 
will be the subject of future rule revisions.

[[Page 2951]]



              Table 5--Summary of New Jersey Candidate Source Categories and Future Rule Revisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Targeted pollutants
         Candidate source categories         ------------------------------------         Affected rules
                                                NOX      VOC      SO2     PM2.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Ozone Transport Commission (OTC)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Asphalt Paving..............................  .......       X   .......  .......  N.J.A.C.\1\ 7:27-16.19.
Asphalt Production..........................       X   .......  .......  .......  N.J.A.C. 7:27-19.9.
Glass Furnaces..............................       X   .......  .......  .......  N.J.A.C. 7:27-19.2, 19.10.
Industrial Adhesives & Sealants.............  .......       X   .......  .......  N.J.A.C. 7:27-26 (New Rule).
Industrial, Commercial & Institutional             X   .......  .......  .......  N.J.A.C. 7:27-19.2, 19.7.
 Boilers.
Coal-fired EGU \2\ Boilers..................       X   .......       X        X   N.J.A.C. 7:27-4, 10 & 19.4.
EGUs........................................       X   .......  .......  .......  N.J.A.C. 7:27-19.4.
High Electrical Demand Day EGUs.............       X   .......  .......  .......  N.J.A.C. 7:27-19.4, 19.5, &
                                                                                   19.29.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association (MARAMA)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petroleum Refineries \4\....................       X        X        X   .......  N.J.A.C. 7:27-33 (New Rule).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               State of New Jersey
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petroleum and VOC Storage Tanks.............  .......       X   .......  .......  N.J.A.C. 7:27-16.2.
Facility-Specific Emission Limit &                 X        X   .......  .......  N.J.A.C. 7:27-16.17 & 19.13.
 Alternative Emission Limit.
BART \3\-affected Equipment.................       X   .......       X        X   N.J.A.C. 7:27-33 (New rule).
Municipal Waste Combustors..................       X   .......  .......  .......  N.J.A.C. 7:27-19.12.
Publicly-owned Treatment Works (sewage             X   .......  .......  .......  N.J.A.C. 7:27-19.28.
 sludge incinerators).
CTGs issued after 2006 \4\..................  .......       X   .......  .......  N.J.A.C. 7:27-16.7.
Process Heaters & Boilers at Petroleum             X   .......  .......  .......  N.J.A.C. 7:27-33 (New Rule).
 Refineries \4\.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ N.J.A.C.--New Jersey Administrative Code.
\2\ EGU--Electric Generating Unit.
\3\ BART--Best Available Retrofit Technology.
\4\ Future Rule Revisions.

4. What Is EPA's Evaluation?
    New Jersey submitted a RACT assessment in a SIP revision dated 
August 1, 2007 and supplemented the submittal on December 14, 2007. New 
Jersey's RACT analysis included 56 CTG and ACT source categories and 
over 59 non-CTG source categories.
    Of those 115 categories New Jersey has concluded that the RACT 
rules currently approved into the SIP meet the RACT requirement for 102 
categories under the 8-hour ozone standard. New Jersey has identified 
13 categories for which it has preliminarily determined that new limits 
should be proposed. New Jersey has since proposed provisions for all 13 
of these categories.
    The RACT submission from the State of New Jersey consists of: (1) A 
certification that previously adopted RACT controls in New Jersey's SIP 
for 101 source categories that were approved by EPA under the 1-hour 
ozone NAAQS are based on the currently available technically and 
economically feasible controls, and that they continue to represent 
RACT for the 8-hour ozone implementation purposes; (2) a commitment to 
adopt new or more stringent regulations that represent RACT control 
levels for both specific source categories and specific sources; and 
(3) a negative declaration that for certain of CTGs and/or ACTs there 
are no sources within New Jersey or that there are no sources above the 
applicability thresholds.
    EPA has reviewed the State's RACT analysis and agrees with the 
State's conclusions. EPA is proposing to conditionally approve the RACT 
SIP for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on New Jersey's commitment to 
submit adopted RACT rules for 13 source categories by April 1, 2009. We 
believe that New Jersey will be able to meet this commitment because 
the State has already proposed RACT provisions for all 13 source 
categories and has recently adopted a rule for one of the source 
categories and the comment period for the remaining categories has 
closed.

E. RACM Analysis

1. What Are the Act Requirements?
    Pursuant to section 172(c)(1) of the Act, states are required to 
implement all Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) as 
expeditiously as practicable. Specifically, section 172(c)(1) states 
the following: ``In general--Such plan provisions shall provide for the 
implementation of all reasonably available control measures as 
expeditiously as practicable (including such reductions in emissions 
from existing sources in the area as may be obtained through the 
adoption, at a minimum, of reasonably available control technology) and 
shall provide for attainment of the national primary ambient air 
quality standards.''
    Furthermore, in EPA's Phase 2 Rule, EPA describes how states must 
include with their attainment demonstration a RACM analysis (70 FR 
71659). The purpose of the RACM analysis is to determine whether or not 
reasonably available control measures exist that would advance the 
attainment date for nonattainment areas. Control measures that would 
advance the attainment date are considered RACM and must be included in 
the SIP. RACM are necessary to ensure that the attainment date is 
achieved ``as expeditious as practicable.''
    RACM is defined by the EPA as any potential control measure for 
application to point, area, on-road and non-road emission source 
categories that meets the following criteria:
     The control measure is technologically feasible
     The control measure is economically feasible
     The control measure does not cause ``substantial 
widespread and long-term adverse impacts''
     The control measure is not ``absurd, unenforceable, or 
impracticable''
     The control measure can advance the attainment date by at 
least one year.

[[Page 2952]]

2. How Did the State Perform the RACM Analysis?
    New Jersey used four separate efforts to identify measures that 
might be considered as potential RACM: The transportation control 
measures (TCMs) for on-road mobile sources effort, the non-TCM measures 
(point, area and off-road sources) effort, the New Jersey workgroup 
measures effort, and the OTC measures effort.
a. Transportation Control Measures
    The New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT), in 
consultation with the NJDEP, identified 26 measures to be evaluated as 
prospective mobile source measures that could be considered reasonably 
available control measures. After identifying these measures, NJDOT 
analyzed each measure for its potential emissions reduction benefit, 
economic impact, practicability and potential adverse impact. NJDOT 
analyzed each prospective emission control measure for each 
nonattainment area. Eleven measures advanced to the final stage of the 
RACM analysis.
b. Non-TCM Measures (Point, Area and Off-Road Sources)
    NJDEP reviewed a variety of sources of information, such as, those 
from regional planning organizations, other state organizations, 
existing NJDEP documents, EPA regional efforts, and ``Early Action 
Compact'' plans (plans developed and implemented by some states to 
avoid being designated nonattainment), to develop a list of 457 
potential non-transportation control measures (non-TCMs). After 
focusing on those measures with significant VOC and NOX 
emissions and eliminating those that were already in place in New 
Jersey and those that are more stringently addressed at the Federal 
level, a list of 81 potential non-TCMs was advanced to the next phase 
of the analysis and added to the compiled list.
c. New Jersey Workgroup Measures
    New Jersey organized the ``Reducing Air Pollution Together 
Initiative,'' which brought together over 200 people representing 
various industries, environmental and civic groups. Six workgroups were 
formed to develop potential control measures for NJDEP consideration. A 
list of 250 potential measures was developed and ranked and the 
workgroups prepared ``White Papers'' for 60 measures that passed the 
next round of evaluations. A more extensive review followed with 21 
measures being added to the compiled list of potential RACM measures.
d. OTC Measures
    New Jersey worked with the other states that are part of the Ozone 
Transport Commission to identify regional control measures that would 
be of greater benefit if implemented by all the states in the OTC 
region. Several of these control measures were identified for adoption 
and the remaining measures were added to the compiled list.
e. Compiled Measures
    NJDEP compiled a list of 103 non-TCM measures [81 from the Non-TCM 
(point, area and off-road sources), 21 from NJDEP workgroup (white 
papers), and 1 OTC measure] and analyzed these measures using the RACM 
criterion for technological feasibility. A total of 85 measures passed 
the technological feasibility criterion. Table F2.1 in Appendix F2 of 
the State's SIP includes a list of all measures considered and the 
reasons that they passed or failed each RACM criterion. If sufficient 
information was not available for a technological feasibility 
determination to be made for a measure, the measure was evaluated for 
the remaining criteria, and a ``N/A'' determination was made for 
technological feasibility. The remaining 85 measures were analyzed for 
economic feasibility and other local factors, such as whether the 
measure could be implemented by June 2008.\2\ A total of 17 non-TCM 
measures advanced to the final stage of analysis. A total of 28 
measures, 11 TCMs and 17 non-TCMs, passed the technological 
feasibility, economic feasibility and ``other local considerations'' 
RACM criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ June 2008 was selected as measures would need to be 
implemented by that time in order to advance the attainment date. 
Measures relied on for attainment need to be implemented by the 
beginning of the final full ozone season preceding the attainment 
date. Thus, to advance attainment to 2009, measures would need to be 
implemented by the beginning of the 2008 ozone season.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. What Were the Results of the RACM Analysis?
    In order for any measure to advance the attainment date of June 
2010 to June 2009, the measures would have to be implemented and 
achieve the emission reductions by June 2008. The combined emission 
benefits from VOC and NOX measures were 15.5 tons/day in the 
Northern New Jersey Counties and 7.4 tons/day in the Southern New 
Jersey Counties. The State's analysis demonstrated that none of the 
RACM's, singularly or in combination, will yield emissions benefits 
sufficient to advance the 2010 attainment date for the two 
nonattainment areas in which the New Jersey counties are located. 
Regardless, the State committed to develop and implement five of these 
measures as part of its RACT control program and New Jersey has 
proposed all five of these measures for rulemaking.
4. What Is EPA's Evaluation?
    New Jersey evaluated all source categories that could contribute 
meaningful emission reductions and identified and evaluated an 
extensive list of potential control measures. The State considered the 
time needed to develop and adopt regulations and the time it would take 
to see the benefit from these measures as a further screen of their 
reasonableness and availability. The State has proceeded with 
developing several of the measures as part of its RACT control program. 
EPA has reviewed the RACM analysis and finds that there are no RACM 
that would advance the moderate area attainment date of 2010 for the 
two nonattainment areas in which the New Jersey counties are located.
    Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve New Jersey's moderate area 
RACM SIP for the two moderate nonattainment areas in which New Jersey 
is located.

F. Conformity Budgets

1. What Are the Act Requirements?
    The Act requires Federal actions in nonattainment and maintenance 
areas to ``conform to'' the goals of SIPs. This means that such actions 
will not: (a) Cause or contribute to violations of a NAAQS; (b) worsen 
the severity of an existing violation; or (c) delay timely attainment 
of any NAAQS. Actions involving Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) 
or Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding or approval are subject 
to the transportation conformity rule (40 CFR part 93, subpart A). 
Under this rule, metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) in 
nonattainment and maintenance areas coordinate with state air quality 
and transportation agencies, EPA, and the FHWA and FTA to demonstrate 
that their long range transportation plans (``plans'') and 
transportation improvement programs (TIP) conform to applicable SIPs. 
This is typically determined by showing that estimated emissions from 
existing and planned highway and transit projects are less than or 
equal to the motor vehicle emissions budgets (``budgets'') contained in 
a SIP. The General Conformity regulation (40 CFR part 93, subpart B) 
requires actions initiated by other Federal agencies in nonattainment 
and maintenance areas to also conform

[[Page 2953]]

to the SIP. One option for Federal agencies to demonstrate conformity 
is to meet facility-wide emissions budgets that are specified in the 
SIP. New Jersey has two major Federal facilities for which it has 
chosen to establish facility-wide emissions budgets.
2. What Conformity Budgets Were Included in the SIP?
    Three MPOs cover New Jersey's two ozone nonattainment areas. New 
Jersey sets budgets per MPO (called ``sub-area budgets''), allowing 
each MPO to make a conformity determination independent of the other 
two on the condition that the other MPOs in the same nonattainment area 
have conforming plans and TIPs in place when the new determination is 
made. Both the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) and 
the South Jersey Transportation Planning Organization (SJTPO) reside 
within the Southern New Jersey Counties. Twelve of the thirteen 
counties covered by the North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority 
(NJTPA) are within the Northern New Jersey Counties, while one county 
(Ocean County) is within the Southern New Jersey Counties. Since 
conformity is determined on a nonattainment area basis, New Jersey is 
designating separate budgets for Ocean County and the remaining 12-
county NJTPA area. As these budgets cover separate nonattainment areas, 
NJTPA may not combine the Ocean County budget with the 12-county budget 
to make an overall conformity determination in the event that one area 
is unable to meet its individual budget; however, this does not 
preclude NJTPA from making a positive conformity finding in the other 
area. Table 6 lists New Jersey's submitted budgets.

                        Table 6--Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Submitted by New Jersey
                                                 [Tons per day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               2008                            2009
                       MPO                       ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        VOC             NOX             VOC             NOX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NJTPA (except Ocean County).....................           85.38          143.60           79.00          133.39
NJTPA (Ocean County only).......................            6.93            8.69            6.45           12.65
DVRPC...........................................           27.75           69.67           25.98           63.66
SJTPO...........................................           14.14           32.93           13.04           29.64
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 7 contains emission budgets for McGuire Air Force Base (AFB) 
and Lakehurst Naval Air Station (NAS). These budgets were established 
in consultation with the United States Air Force and the Navy and will 
provide McGuire AFB and Lakehurst NAS the operational flexibility 
necessary to meet their missions and future missions of the Department 
of Defense and allow them to meet the requirements of the General 
Conformity regulation.

                           Table 7--Emission Budgets for McGuire AFB and Lakehurst NAS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    VOC (tons/      NOX (tons/
                              Base                                     Year            year)           year)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
McGuire AFB.....................................................            2008             730           1,534
                                                                            2009             730           1,534
                                                                            2010             730           1,534
                                                                            2011             730           1,534
Lakehurst NAS...................................................            2008             109             563
                                                                            2009             115             639
                                                                            2010             122             716
                                                                            2011             129             793
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. What Is EPA's Evaluation?
    For budgets to be approvable, they must meet, at a minimum, EPA's 
adequacy criteria (40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)). EPA made an adequacy 
determination on New Jersey's 2008 and 2009 budgets on July 17, 2008 
(73 FR 41068). In our Notice of Adequacy we found that the budgets were 
``clearly identified and precisely quantified'' and were ``consistent 
with applicable requirements.* * *'' We also found that the budgets 
were ``consistent with and clearly related to the emissions inventory 
and the control measures in the submitted control strategy 
implementation plan revision.'' The budgets are identical to the 
projected 2008 and 2009 on-road mobile source emission inventories.
    When EPA determines that budgets are adequate for transportation 
conformity, we note that an adequacy finding does not imply that 
budgets will ultimately be approved. In our adequacy determination EPA 
found that the 2009 budgets demonstrate additional progress toward 
attainment, however, since EPA will be taking action on the attainment 
demonstration at a later date, EPA will at that time take action on the 
2009 budgets. Consistent with our adequacy review of New Jersey's 
submittal, EPA is proposing to approve New Jersey's 2008 budgets 
associated with the 2008 RFP budgets. EPA is also proposing to approve 
the general conformity budgets for McGuire AFB and Lakehurst NAS.

V. What Are EPA's Conclusions?

    EPA is proposing to approve the following SIP elements required by 
the Act: 2008 RFP and associated 2008 ozone projection year emission 
inventories, contingency measures for failure to meet the 2008 RFP 
milestone, 2008 conformity budgets used for planning purposes, moderate 
area RACM analysis, and general conformity budgets.
    EPA has reviewed the State's RACT analysis and agrees with the 
State's conclusions. EPA is proposing to conditionally approve the RACT 
analysis for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on New Jersey's commitment to 
submit adopted RACT rules for 13 source categories by April 1, 2009. We 
believe that New Jersey will be able to

[[Page 2954]]

meet this commitment because the State has proposed RACT rules for all 
13 source categories and has recently adopted a rule for one of these 
source categories.
    EPA is proposing to conditionally approve the RACT analysis based 
on a commitment submitted by New Jersey. Under section 110(k)(4) of the 
Act, EPA may conditionally approve a plan based on a commitment from 
the State to adopt specific enforceable measures by a date certain, but 
not later than 1 year from the date of approval. If EPA conditionally 
approves the commitment in a final rulemaking action, the State must 
meet its commitment to adopt the identified regulations. If the State 
fails to do so, this action will become a disapproval upon the State's 
failure to meet its commitment. EPA will notify the State by letter 
that this action has occurred. If the conditional approval converts to 
a disapproval, the commitment will no longer be a part of the approved 
New Jersey SIP. Upon notification of the State that the conditional 
approval has converted to a disapproval, EPA will publish a notice in 
the Federal Register notifying the public that the conditional approval 
automatically converted to a disapproval. If the State meets its 
commitment, within the applicable time frame, the conditionally 
approved submission will remain a part of the SIP until EPA takes final 
action approving or disapproving the new SIP revision. If EPA 
disapproves the RACT SIP submittal, such action will start a sanctions 
and FIP clock. If EPA approves the submittal, the RACT analysis will be 
fully approved in its entirety and will replace the RACT conditionally 
approved into the SIP.
    EPA is not taking action at this time on New Jersey's attainment 
demonstrations for the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-
CT and the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE 8-hour 
ozone moderate nonattainment areas, but will do so in a future 
rulemaking.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a 
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and 
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 
Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves state law as meeting 
Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond 
those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in 
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of 
nitrogen, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 
organic compounds.

    Dated: December 29, 2008.
Alan J. Steinberg,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. E9-944 Filed 1-15-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P