[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 189 (Monday, October 2, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45845-45846]
[FR Doc No: 2017-21108]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9968-52-Region 6]

Notice of Final NPDES General Permit; Final NPDES General Permit
for New and Existing Sources and New Dischargers in the Offshore
Subcategory of the Oil and Gas Extraction Category for the Western
Portion of the Outer Continental Shelf of the Gulf of Mexico
(GMG290000)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Final NPDES General Permit.

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

SUMMARY: The Director of the Water Division, EPA Region 6 today
provides notice that the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) General Permit No. GMG290000 for existing and new
sources and new dischargers in the Offshore Subcategory of the Oil and
Gas Extraction Point Source Category, located in and discharging to the
Outer Continental Shelf offshore of Louisiana and Texas was reissued on
September 19, 2017, with an effective date of October 1, 2017. The
discharge of produced water to that portion of the Outer Continental
Shelf from Offshore Subcategory facilities located in the territorial
seas of Louisiana and Texas is also authorized by this permit.

DATES: This permit was issued September 19, 2017, is effective on
October 1, 2017, and expires September 30, 2022. This effective date is
necessary to provide dischargers with the immediate opportunity to
comply with Clean Water Act requirements in light of the expiration of
the 2012 permit on September 30, 2017. In accordance with 40 CFR 23,
this permit shall be considered issued for the purpose of judicial
review on October 16, 2017. Under section 509(b) of the CWA, judicial
review of this general permit can be held by filing a petition for
review in the United States Court of Appeals within 120 days after the
permit is considered issued for judicial review. Under section
509(b)(2) of the CWA, the requirements in this permit may not be
challenged later in civil or criminal proceedings to enforce these
requirements. In addition, this permit may not be challenged in other
agency proceedings. Deadlines for submittal of notices of intent are
provided in Part I.A.2 of the permit.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Evelyn Rosborough, Region 6, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-
2733. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of the proposal of the draft permit
was published in the Federal Register on May 11, 2017. EPA Region 6 has
considered all comments received and makes several significant changes
as listed below. A copy of the Region's responses to comments and the
final permit may be found online from the Federal eRulemaking Portal:
http://www.regulations.gov with Docket ID No EPA-R6-OW-2017-0217.
Significant changes include:
    1. An operator is not required to file eNOI 24-hour in advance to
obtain permit coverage;
    2. An operator has up to one year after termination of lease
ownership to file a Notice of Termination (NOT);
    3. In a case-by-case circumstance, the primary operator may require
day-to-day or vessel operators to file their own eNOIs for dual
coverages;
    4. Drilling vessels performing jobs within the same lease block may
file one NOI for coverage;
    5. Bridged facilities may file one eNOI;
    6. In the event the eNOI system is temporarily unavailable, a
written temporary NOI filed with certification and signature is good
for seven days from the day of filing, but must be followed up with an
eNOI;
    7. Existing permittees covered under the 2012 permit will be
covered by this permit until April 1, 2018, with eNOIs to continue
coverage due on or before that date;
    8. An oil and grease confirmation sample shall be taken within two
hours after sheen is observed from produced water discharge;
    9. Toxicity testing frequency for produced water discharges remains
the same as in the previous permit;
    10. Existing dischargers under the 2012 permit shall commence
testing schedules in the 2017 permit as of the effective day of this
permit;
    11. Additional toxicity testing for produced water after an
application of well treatment, completion or workover fluids is not
required; information on these discharges will be collected as part of
the well treatment, completion, and workover fluids (TCW) Studies;
    12. The deadlines for operators to submit the Industry-wide Study
Plan and the final report for well treatment, completion, and workover
fluids are changed;
    13. A condition which requires operators to flush and capture
hydrate control fluids or pipeline brine contained in pipelines,
umbilical, or

jumpers before or at the time of abandonment is removed from the final
permit;
    14. Fixed monitoring frequency is replaced with tier-approach
monitoring frequency for intake velocity through the cooling water
intake structure; and
    15. An exception to allow operators to submit SEAMAP data instead
of entrainment monitoring is added.
    16. Monitoring exception for sanitary and domestic waste discharges
using approved Marine Sanitation Devices (MSDs) from previous permit
was reinstated.

Other Legal Requirements

Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is a ``significant regulatory action.'' Accordingly, EPA
submitted this action to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011) and any changes made in response to OMB recommendations have been
documented in the docket for this action.
    Consideration of Other Federal or State Laws. State certification
under section 401 of the CWA; consistency with the State Coastal
Management Program; and compliance with National Environmental Policy
Act, Endangered Species Act, Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act, Historic Preservation Act, Paperwork Reduction Act, and
Regulatory Flexibility Act are discussed in the Region's Final Permit
Fact Sheet.

    Dated: September 19, 2017.
William B. Honker,
Director, Water Division, EPA Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2017-21108 Filed 9-29-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


05_mobile_nei_version_2_report.pdf"
ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005_nei/mobile_sector/documentation/200
5_mobile_nei_version_2_report.pdf .

Factor 5:  Growth rates and patterns

This factor considers population growth for 2000-2005 and growth in
vehicle miles traveled for 1996-2005 for counties in Huntington-Ashland
area, as well as patterns of population and VMT growth.  A county with
rapid population or VMT growth is generally an integral part of an urban
area and likely to be contributing to fine particle concentrations in
the area.

Table 6 below shows population, population growth, VMT, and VMT growth
for counties that are included in the Huntington-Ashland area.  Counties
are listed in descending order based on VMT growth between 1996 and
2005.

Table 6.  Population and VMT Growth and Percent Change.

County	Population (2005)	Population % change (2000-2005)	2005 VMT

(106 mi)	VMT

% change

(1996-2005)

Wayne, WV	     41,959 	-2	        438 	          47

Cabell, WV	     93,988 	-3	      1,230 	          41

Mason, WV	     25,763 	-1	        249 	          36

Greenup, KY	     37,206 	1 	        371 	          23

Boyd, KY	     49,359 	-1	        574 	          16

Lawrence, KY	     16,162 	4 	        159 	           11

Lawrence, OH	     62,946 	1 	        650 	            9

Adams, OH	     28,454 	4 	        283 	            7

Gallia, OH	     31,241 	0 	        247 	            0

Scioto, OH	     76,506 	-3	        591 	           -3

Several of the Huntington-Ashland area counties encountered strong VMT
growth from 1996 to 2005.  In Ohio, the VMT growth was limited with
Adams and Lawrence Counties having modest increases.  The VMT did not
change in Gallia County.  It declined slightly in Scioto County.  The
populations of the area counties remained stable from 2000 to 2005 with
small changes being observed.  The Ohio counties in the area followed
this pattern.  Adams County, Ohio matched Lawrence County, Kentucky with
4% population growth as the largest changes in the area.  These changes
do not suggest any significant shifts in the distribution of population
or VMT to be considered in the designations process.  Thus, this factor
was not significant in determining the boundary of the nonattainment
area.

Factor 6:  Meteorology (weather/transport patterns)

For this factor, EPA considered data from National Weather Service
instruments and other meteorological monitoring sites in the area.  Wind
direction and wind speed data for 2005-2007 were analyzed, with an
emphasis on “high PM2.5 days” for each of two seasons, an
October-April “cold” season and a May-September “warm” season.
These high days are defined as days where any FRM or FEM air quality
monitors had 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations above 95% on a frequency
distribution curve of PM2.5 24-hour values.

 values by color; days exceeding 35 μg/m3 are denoted with a red or
black icon.  A dot indicates the day occurred in the warm season; a
triangle indicates the day occurred in the cool season.  The center of
the figure indicates the location of the air quality monitoring site,
and the location of the icon in relation to the center indicates the
direction from which the wind was blowing on that day.  An icon that is
close to the center indicates a low average wind speed on that day.
Higher wind speeds are indicated when the icon is further away from the
center.

The pollution rose for the critical Cabell County monitoring site is
provided as Figure 2, and the pollution rose for the Scioto County
monitoring site is provided as Figure 3.  Winds on high concentration
days show a slight tendency to come from the north or northeast or the
south or southwest, although on some high concentration days winds come
from other directions as well.  Therefore, it is appropriate to consider
counties in all directions from the violations.  The pollution roses
indicate that any nearby surrounding counties with high emissions would
be contributing to the violating monitors.

Figure 2

Figure 3

Note:  the meteorology factor is also considered in each county’s
Contributing Emissions Score because the method for deriving this metric
included an analysis of trajectories of air masses for high PM2.5 days.

Factor 7:  Geography/topography (mountain ranges or other air basin
boundaries)

The geography/topography analysis evaluates the physical features of the
land that might have an effect on the air shed and, therefore, on the
distribution of PM2.5 over the area.

The Huntington-Ashland area does not have any geographical or
topographical barriers significantly limiting air-pollution transport
within its air shed.  Therefore, this factor did not play a significant
role in the decision-making process.

Factor 8:  Jurisdictional boundaries

In evaluating the jurisdictional boundary factor, EPA gave special
consideration to areas that were already designated nonattainment in
2005 for violating the 1997 fine particle standards.  Analysis of
chemical composition data in these areas indicates that the same
components that make up most of the PM2.5 mass in the area on an annual
average basis such as sulfate and direct PM2.5 carbon in many eastern
areas also are key contributors to the PM2.5 mass on days exceeding the
24-hour PM2.5 standard.  These data indicate that in many cities, the
same source categories that contribute to violations of the annual
standard also contribute to exceedances of the 24-hour standard.

EPA has generally concluded that counties that were designated as having
emissions sources contributing to fine particle concentrations which
exceeded the 1997 standards (all areas violated the annual standard, two
also violated the previous 24-hour standard) also contribute to fine
particle concentrations on the highest days.  For this reason, EPA
believes that for most existing nonattainment areas, the nonattainment
area for the 2006 24-hour standard should be the same.  Consideration
also should be given to existing boundaries and organizations as they
may facilitate air quality planning and the implementation of control
measures to attain the standard.  Areas already designated as
nonattainment represent important boundaries for state air quality
planning.

The KYOVA Interstate Planning Commission is the Metropolitan Planning
Organization (MPO) for Lawrence County, OH.  KYOVA website:
http://www.state.wv.us/kyova/.

There are no counties in the Ohio portion of the Huntington-Ashland
maintenance area for the ozone standard.  Boyd County, Kentucky and
Cabell and Wayne Counties in West Virginia comprise the ozone
maintenance area.

The Huntington-Ashland nonattainment area is identical to the
nonattainment area designated under the 1997 PM2.5 standard, which will
facilitate air quality planning.

Factor 9:  Level of control of emission sources

Under this factor, the existing level of control of emission sources is
taken into consideration.  The emissions data used by EPA in this
technical analysis and provided in Table 1 under Factor 1 represent
emissions levels taking into account any control strategies implemented
in the Huntington-Ashland area before 2005 on stationary, mobile, and
area sources.  Data are presented for PM2.5 components that are directly
emitted, carbonaceous PM2.5 and crustal PM2.5, and for pollutants which
react in the atmosphere to form fine particles such as SO2, NOx, VOC,
and ammonia.

In considering county-level emissions, EPA used data from the 2005
National Emissions Inventory, the most updated version of the national
inventory available at the beginning of the designations process in late
2007.  However, EPA recognized that for certain counties, emissions may
have changed since 2005.  For example, certain power plants or large
sources of emissions in or near this area may have installed emission
controls or otherwise significantly reduced emissions since 2005.  Some
States provided updated information on emissions and emission controls
in their comments to EPA.  EPA considered such additional information in
making final designation decisions.

With regard to nearby power plants, EPA considered information about
whether a specific plant installed federally enforceable emission
controls by December 2008 resulting in significant emissions reductions.
 A control requirement is considered to be federally-enforceable if it
is required by a State regulation adopted in a State implementation
plan, if it is included in a federally-enforceable Title V operating
permit, or if it is required by a consent decree which also requires the
controls to be included in federally enforceable permit upon termination
of the consent decree.  In making final decisions, EPA also considered
whether a facility would continue to emit pollutants which contribute to
PM2.5 exceedances even after emission controls are operational.

Ohio provided information on the status of emission controls at four
plants in the Huntington-Ashland area.  Some of the emissions have long
been controlled with effective control equipment, some of the emissions
have become well controlled more recently, and some of these emissions
are expected to be controlled within a few years.  In Gallia County,
Gavin Station has long had control equipment reducing SO2 emissions and
more recently has installed controls to reduce NOx emissions, but
emissions remain high.  Also in Gallia County, Kyger Creek Station is
expected to install SO2 emission controls by 2010, but current emissions
remain high.  In Adams County, Stuart Station is subject to a consent
decree requiring future control of both SO2 and NOx.  Also in Adams
County, Killen Station has installed control equipment both for SO2 and
for NOx, although EPA is aware of no enforceable requirement for the
company to operate this equipment, particularly if the D.C. Circuit
Court of Appeals vacates CAIR.  More importantly, even with these
controls, total emissions from these plants remain somewhat high.  The
company, in comments submitted in response to EPA solicitation of public
comments, stated that emissions with control are still 7200 tons per
year of SO2 and 20,000 tons per year of NOx.  Company emission reports
posted on EPA’s acid rain program web site suggest a comparable
controlled SO2 emission rate, but data on EPA’s NOx budget program web
site suggests a controlled emission rate from the two plants adding to
4800 tons for the five month ozone season, which if controls were
operated full year would suggest an annual emission rate of 11,400 tons
per year.  In either case, the emissions from this facility even with
controls are sufficient that coupled with meteorology EPA is judging
that these facilities contribute to violations in Scioto and Cabell
Counties.  Also of concern is that no permit or other enforceable
document requires operation of the NOx control equipment year round at
Killen Station.  As noted above EPA must base designations on current
conditions notwithstanding any planned future emissions controls.
Therefore, EPA is including Monroe and Sprigg Townships in Adams County
and Cheshire Township in Gallia County, along with Scioto and Lawrence
Counties, in the Huntington-Ashland nonattainment area.  However, since
neither Adams nor Gallia rank high for any factor other than emissions,
EPA has designated only the townships where the power plant emissions
are located.

EPA has responded in detail to all of the comments submitted by Ohio in
the Response to State Comments document in the docket for this
rulemaking.

EPA Technical Analysis for Parkersburg-Marietta, West Virginia-Ohio

Parkersburg-Marietta is a two-state nonattainment area.  Under the 1997
standards, Washington County, Ohio along with Pleasants (partial) and
Wood Counties, West Virginia comprised the nonattainment area.  A
violation is being observed in Wood County, West Virginia.  The analysis
of the Parkersburg-Marietta area for designations under the 2006
standards examined the entire area, though this discussion only
addresses the Ohio portion of the area.  In a May 30, 2008 letter, Ohio
recommended retaining Washington County in the Parkersburg-Marietta
nonattainment area.

EPA agrees with Ohio’s recommendation for this area.  The emissions
from Washington County are high.  Sulfur dioxide emissions are
especially high because of the two power plants in the county.  Emission
controls are limited for these facilities.  The population and traffic
in Washington County is comparable to the rest of the
Parkersburg-Marietta area.  There is no air quality monitoring in
Washington County.

The surrounding Ohio counties have relatively low emissions, and no
other factor warrants their inclusion in the nonattainment area.

Figure 1 is a map of the counties in the nonattainment area and other
relevant information such as the locations and design values of air
quality monitors, and the metropolitan area boundary.

Figure 1

For this area, EPA previously established PM2.5 nonattainment boundaries
for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS that included three full and partial counties
including Washington County in Ohio.

In its May 30, 2008 letter, Ohio recommended the same Ohio county be
designated as “nonattainment” for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard
based on air quality data from 2005-2007.  These data are from Federal
Reference Method (FRM) monitors located in the state.

In August 2008, EPA notified Ohio of its intended designations.  In this
letter, EPA also requested that if the State wished to provide comments
on EPA’s intended designation, it should do so by October 20, 2008.
EPA stated that it would consider any additional information (e.g., on
power plants or partial county areas) provided by the state in making
final decisions on the designations.

Based on EPA's technical analysis described below, EPA designated
Washington County, Ohio and a full and a partial county in West Virginia
nonattainment for the 24-hour PM2.5 air-quality standard as part of the
Parkersburg nonattainment area, based upon currently available
information.

The following is a review of data for relevant factors for the Ohio
portion of the Parkersburg, West Virginia-Ohio area.

Factor 1:  Emissions data

For this factor, EPA evaluated county level emission data for the
following PM2.5 components and precursor pollutants:  “PM2.5 emissions
total,” “PM2.5 emissions carbon,” “PM2.5 emissions other,”
“SO2,” “NOx,” “VOCs,” and “NH3.”  “PM2.5 emissions
total” represents direct emissions of PM2.5 and includes: “PM2.5
emissions carbon,” “PM2.5 emissions other”, primary sulfate (SO4),
and primary nitrate.  (Although primary sulfate and primary nitrate,
which are emitted directly from stacks rather than forming in
atmospheric reactions with SO2 and NOx, are part of “PM2.5 emissions
total,” they are not shown in Table 1 as separate items).  “PM2.5
emissions carbon” represents the sum of organic carbon (OC) and
elemental carbon (EC) emissions, and “PM2.5 emissions other”
represents other inorganic particles (crustal).  Emissions of SO2 and
NOx, which are precursors of the secondary PM2.5 components sulfate and
nitrate, are also considered.  VOCs (volatile organic compounds) and NH3
(ammonia) are also potential PM2.5 precursors and are included for
consideration.

Emissions data were derived from the 2005 National Emissions Inventory
(NEI), version 1.  See
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/pm/pm25_2006_techinfo.html.

EPA also considered the Contributing Emissions Score (CES) for each
county.  The CES is a metric that takes into consideration emissions
data, meteorological data, and air quality monitoring information to
provide a relative ranking of counties in and near an area.  Note that
this metric is not the exclusive manner for considering data for these
factors.  A more detailed description can be found at
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/pm/pm25_2006_techinfo.html#C.

Table 1 shows emissions of PM2.5 and precursor pollutants components
(given in tons per year) and the CES for violating and potentially
contributing counties in the Parkersburg-Marietta area.  Counties that
are part of the Parkersburg-Marietta nonattainment area for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS are shown in boldface.  Counties are listed in descending
order by CES.

Table 1.  PM2.5 24-hour Component Emissions, and CES

County	State Recommended Nonattainment?	CES	PM2.5

emissions

total	PM2.5

emissions

carbon	PM2.5

emissions

other	SO2

	NOx

	VOCs

	NH3

Washington, OH	Yes	100	8,286	741	7,545	164,357	24,331	5,194	1,344

Wood, WV	No	54	977	421	557	6,243	5,866	6,295	200

Pleasants, WV	No	16	1,851	144	1,706	62,011	14,912	1,462	112

Athens, OH	No	7	465	228	236	1,459	3,275	2,352	290

Jackson, WV	No	6	817	188	629	3,326	3,036	2,327	164

Meigs, OH	No	5	321	155	168	338	2,161	1,165	834

The emissions and CES of Washington County, Ohio are the largest in the
area.  The emissions and CES of Athens and Meigs Counties, Ohio are well
below the values of counties designated nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5
standards.

Table 2 provides the data for CES weighting factors.  The trajectory
factors are used in CES calculations to account for seasonal
meteorology.  For the top 10% of days in both the cold and warm seasons,
wind trajectories were run for a 48 hour period preceding the high
monitor reading.  The amount of time the air mass was over a county
within the mixing height was calculated.  The values were scaled so that
the maximum value is 100.  Thus, the county that is most likely to be
upwind of a monitor on a high concentration day in a season is given a
score of 100.  The scores for the other counties will reflect the
relative likelihood of being upwind.  As the concentration of a
pollutant will decrease as it goes further downwind, a distance
weighting factor is also used in calculating the CES.  The distance
factor listed on Table 2 provides the distance from the center of a
county to the center of the violating county.  If a county is violating,
the distance used is the average distance from the center to the county
line.  The cold season trajectory factors were not calculated for the
Parkersburg area.

  Table 2.  CES Factor Data

County	CES	Trajectory Factor- Cold	Trajectory Factor- Warm	Distance (mi)

Washington, OH	100

85	14.7

Wood, WV	34

100	10.7

Pleasants, WV	19

75	21.5

Athens, OH	4

77	32

Jackson, WV	4

66	29

Meigs, OH	3

78	32.1

Factor 2:  Air quality data

This factor considers the 24-hour PM2.5 design values (in µg/m3) for
air quality monitors in counties in the Parkersburg-Marietta area based
on data for the 2005-2007 period.  A monitor’s design value indicates
whether that monitor attains a specified air quality standard.  The
24-hour PM2.5 standards are met when the 3-year average of a monitor’s
98th percentile values are 35 µg/m3 or less.  A design value is only
valid if minimum data completeness criteria are met.

The 24-hour PM2.5 design values for counties in the Parkersburg-Marietta
area are shown in Table 3.

	Table 3.  Air Quality Data

County	State

Recommended

 Nonattainment?	Design Values

2004-06

(µg/m3)

	Design Values

2005-07

(µg/m3)

Washington, OH	Yes	0	0

Wood, WV	No	35	37

Pleasants, WV	No	0	0

Athens, OH	No	32	33

Jackson, WV	No	0	0

Meigs, OH	No	0	0

A violation of the 2006 PM2.5 standards occurred in the West Virginia
portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta area.  Wood County, West Virginia
has a 2005-2007 design value above the air quality standards.  Athens
County, Ohio meets the standards.  There is no fine particulate air
quality monitoring data for Meigs or Washington Counties, Ohio.
However, the absence of a violating monitor alone is not a sufficient
reason to eliminate counties as candidates for nonattainment status.
Each county has been evaluated based on the weight of evidence of the
nine factors and other relevant information.

For purposes of its review, EPA used data available from the Chemical
Speciation Network and the Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual
Environments (IMPROVE) network to estimate the composition of fine
particle mass on days with the highest fine particle concentrations.
Analysis of these data indicates that the days with the highest fine
particle concentrations in the Parkersburg area occur about 100% in the
warm season and 0% in the cool season.  In the warm season, the average
chemical composition of the highest days is 72% sulfate, no nitrate, 24%
carbon, and 3% crustal.  In the cool season, the average chemical
composition of the highest days is 34% sulfate, 34% nitrate, 29% carbon,
and 3% crustal.  These data indicate that sources of SO2, NOx, and
direct PM2.5 emissions contribute to violations in the area.

Factor 3: Population density and degree of urbanization (including
commercial development)

Table 4 shows the 2005 population for each county in the area being
evaluated, as well as the population density for each county in that
area.  Population data gives an indication of whether it is likely that
population-based emissions might contribute to violations of the 24-hour
PM2.5 standards.

Table 4.  Population

County	State Recommended Nonattainment?	2005 Population	2005 Population
Density (pop/sq mi)

Washington, OH	Yes	     62,155 	98

Wood, WV	No	     86,881 	231

Pleasants, WV	No	       7,329 	54

Athens, OH	No	     62,028 	121

Jackson, WV	No	     28,306 	60

Meigs, OH	No	     23,179 	54

The population of Washington County, Ohio is slightly smaller than Wood
County, West Virginia.  Athens County, Ohio has a similar population to
Washington County, Ohio.  Meigs County, Ohio has a low population.

Factor 4: Traffic and commuting patterns

This factor considers the number of commuters in each county who drive
to another county within the Parkersburg-Marietta area, the percent of
total commuters in each county who commute within the area, as well as
the total Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) for each county in millions of
miles (see Table 5).  A county with numerous commuters is generally an
integral part of an urban area and is likely contributing to fine
particle concentrations in the area.

Table 5.  Traffic and Commuting Patterns

County	State Recommended Nonattainment?	2005 VMT

(106 mi)	Number Commuting to any violating counties 	Percent

Commuting to any violating counties 	Number Commuting within/to
statistical area 	Percent

Commuting within/to statistical area

Wood, WV	No	        976 	31,700 	85 	      35,720 	          96

Washington, OH	Yes	        686 	5,930 	21 	      26,250 	          94

Pleasants, WV	No	          67 	640 	22 	        2,460 	          86

Athens, OH	No	        480 	560 	2 	        1,030 	            4

Jackson, WV	No	        444 	610 	6 	           690 	            6

Meigs, OH	No	        186 	290 	3 	           630 	            7

The listing of counties on Table 4 reflects a ranking based on the
number of people commuting within or to the Parkersburg-Marietta
statistical area.  The counties that are in the nonattainment area for
the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS are shown in boldface.  The percent commuting
within the Parkersburg area information indicates that Washington,
Pleasants, and Wood Counties are connected.  The small commuting to the
statistical area figures suggests that Athens and Meigs Counties, Ohio
are separate from the Parkersburg-Marietta area.

Note:  The 2005 VMT data used for tables 5 and 6 of the technical
analysis have been derived using methodology such as that described in
"Documentation for the 2005 Mobile National Emissions Inventory, Version
2," December 2008, prepared for the Emission Inventory Group, U.S. EPA.
This document may be found at:   HYPERLINK
"ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005_nei/mobile_sector/documentation/20
05_mobile_nei_version_2_report.pdf"
ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005_nei/mobile_sector/documentation/200
5_mobile_nei_version_2_report.pdf .

Factor 5:  Growth rates and patterns

This factor considers population growth for 2000-2005 and growth in
vehicle miles traveled for 1996-2005 for counties in
Parkersburg-Marietta area, as well as patterns of population and VMT
growth.  A county with rapid population or VMT growth is generally an
integral part of an urban area and likely to be contributing to fine
particle concentrations in the area.

Table 6 below shows population, population growth, VMT, and VMT growth
for counties that are included in the Parkersburg-Marietta area.
Counties are listed in descending order based on VMT growth between 1996
and 2005.

Table 6.  Population and VMT Growth and Percent Change

County	Population (2005)	Population % change (2000-05)	2005 VMT

(106 mi)	VMT

% change

(1996-05)

Pleasants, WV	       7,329 	-2	          67 	          37

Wood, WV	     86,881 	-1	        976 	          11

Athens, OH	     62,028 	0 	        480 	            3

Meigs, OH	     23,179 	1 	        186 	            0

Washington, OH	     62,155 	-2	        686 	          -1

Jackson, WV	     28,306 	1 	        444 	           -7

There was little population change for the counties.  This is not the
case for VMT change.  The West Virginia counties, Pleasants and Wood
Counties, had solid increases in VMT between 1996 and 2005.  Washington
County, Ohio had a slight decline in its VMT.  The Ohio counties near
the area showed little or no VMT growth.

Factor 6:  Meteorology (weather/transport patterns)

For this factor, EPA considered data from National Weather Service
instruments and other meteorological monitoring sites in the area.  Wind
direction and wind speed data for 2005-2007 were analyzed, with an
emphasis on “high PM2.5 days” for each of two seasons, an
October-April “cold” season and a May-September “warm” season.
These high days are defined as days where any FRM or FEM air quality
monitors had 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations above 95% on a frequency
distribution curve of PM2.5 24-hour values.

For each air quality monitoring site, EPA developed a “pollution
rose” to understand the prevailing wind direction and wind speed on
the days with highest fine particle concentrations.  The figure
identifies 24-hour PM2.5 values by color; days exceeding 35 μg/m3 are
denoted with a red or black icon.  A dot indicates the day occurred in
the warm season; a triangle indicates the day occurred in the cool
season.  The center of the figure indicates the location of the air
quality monitoring site, and the location of the icon in relation to the
center indicates the direction from which the wind was blowing on that
day.  An icon that is close to the center indicates a low average wind
speed on that day.  Higher wind speeds are indicated when the icon is
further away from the center.

The pollution rose for the Parkersburg-Marietta area is provided as
Figure 2.  Winds on high concentration days show a slight tendency to
come from the Northeast or Southwest.  Overall, the winds come from a
variety of directions.  So, it is appropriate to consider counties in
all directions from the violations.

Figure 2

Note:  the meteorology factor is also considered in each county’s
Contributing Emissions Score because the method for deriving this metric
included an analysis of trajectories of air masses for high PM2.5 days.

Factor 7:  Geography/topography (mountain ranges or other air basin
boundaries)

The geography/topography analysis evaluates the physical features of the
land that might have an effect on the air shed and, therefore, on the
distribution of PM2.5 over the area.

The Parkersburg-Marietta area does not have any geographical or
topographical barriers significantly limiting air-pollution transport
within its air shed.  Therefore, this factor did not play a significant
role in the decision-making process.

Factor 8:  Jurisdictional boundaries

In evaluating the jurisdictional boundary factor, EPA gave special
consideration to areas that were already designated nonattainment in
2005 for violating the 1997 fine particle standards.  Analysis of
chemical composition data in these areas indicates that the same
components that make up most of the PM2.5 mass in the area on an annual
average basis such as sulfate and direct PM2.5 carbon in many eastern
areas also are key contributors to the PM2.5 mass on days exceeding the
24-hour PM2.5 standard.  These data indicate that in many cities, the
same source categories that contribute to violations of the annual
standard also contribute to exceedances of the 24-hour standard.

EPA has generally concluded that counties that were designated as having
emissions sources contributing to fine particle concentrations which
exceeded the 1997 standards (all areas violated the annual standard, two
also violated the previous 24-hour standard) also contribute to fine
particle concentrations on the highest days.  For this reason, EPA
believes that for most existing nonattainment areas, the nonattainment
area for the 2006 24-hour standard should be the same.  Consideration
also should be given to existing boundaries and organizations as they
may facilitate air quality planning and the implementation of control
measures to attain the standard.  Areas already designated as
nonattainment represent important boundaries for state air quality
planning.

The Wood-Washington-Wirt Interstate Planning Commission (WWW) is the
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the following townships in
Washington County, OH: Newport, Marietta, Fearing, Muskingum, Warren,
Dunham, and Belpre Townships.  WWW website:
http://www.triplew.org/index.html.

The Parkersburg-Marietta ozone maintenance area consists of the
following counties: Washington County, Ohio, and Wood County, West
Virginia.

The Parkersburg-Marietta nonattainment area for the 2006 standards is
identical to the nonattainment area designated under the 1997 PM2.5
standards.

Factor 9:  Level of control of emission sources

Under this factor, the existing level of control of emission sources is
taken into consideration.  The emissions data used by EPA in this
technical analysis and provided in Table 1 under Factor 1 represent
emissions levels taking into account any control strategies implemented
in the Parkersburg-Marietta area before 2005 on stationary, mobile, and
area sources.  Data are presented for PM2.5 components that are directly
emitted, carbonaceous PM2.5 and crustal PM2.5, and for pollutants which
react in the atmosphere to form fine particles such as SO2, NOx, VOC,
and ammonia.

In considering county-level emissions, EPA used data from the 2005
National Emissions Inventory, the most updated version of the national
inventory available at the beginning of the designations process in late
2007.  However, EPA recognized that for certain counties, emissions may
have changed since 2005.  For example, certain power plants or large
sources of emissions in or near this area may have installed emission
controls or otherwise significantly reduced emissions since 2005.  Some
States provided updated information on emissions and emission controls
in their comments to EPA.  EPA considered such additional information in
making final designation decisions.

With regard to nearby power plants, EPA considered information about
whether a specific plant installed federally enforceable emission
controls by December 2008 resulting in significant emissions reductions.
 A control requirement is considered to be federally-enforceable if it
is required by a State regulation adopted in a State implementation
plan, if it is included in a federally-enforceable Title V operating
permit, or if it is required by a consent decree which also requires the
controls to be included in federally enforceable permit upon termination
of the consent decree.  In making final decisions, EPA also considered
whether a facility would continue to emit pollutants which contribute to
PM2.5 exceedances even after emission controls are operational.

Ohio did not provide other information regarding other power plants or
any other large sources in the Parkersburg-Marietta area.

EPA Technical Analysis for Steubenville-Weirton, Ohio-West Virginia

The Steubenville-Weirton nonattainment area designated for the 1997
standards is comprised of three counties: Jefferson County, Ohio, and
Brooke and Hancock Counties, West Virginia.  Violations of the 2006
standards have been monitored in all three of these counties.  Ohio
recommended Jefferson County to be nonattainment under the 2006
standards in its December 17, 2007 letter.

EPA agreed with Ohio’s recommendation.  The emissions from Jefferson
County, Ohio, especially sulfur dioxide, are high.  There are two power
plants in Jefferson County that contribute to the high emissions.
Emission controls have been added at some units of the Cardinal plant,
but SO2 emission controls at the remaining unit at Cardinal and at the
several units at the Sammis plant are not expected to be installed until
2010 or later.  Thus, Jefferson County emissions remain large, and
continue to contribute to violations in this area

The Steubenville area is relatively near to the Pittsburgh area.
However, EPA believes that these two areas are sufficiently distinct to
warrant treatment as separate nonattainment areas.

Other counties around the Steubenville-Weirton area have relatively low
emissions.  No other factor warrants inclusion of any additional Ohio
county in the Steubenville-Weirton nonattainment area.

Figure 1 is a map of the counties in the nonattainment area and other
relevant information such as the locations and design values of air
quality monitors, and the metropolitan area boundary.

 Figure 1

For this area, EPA previously established PM2.5 nonattainment boundaries
for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS that included three counties including
Jefferson County, Ohio.

In its December 17, 2007 letter, Ohio recommended the same Ohio counties
be designated as “nonattainment” for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard
based on air quality data from 2004-2006.  These data are from Federal
Reference Method (FRM) monitors located in the state.

In August 2008, EPA notified Ohio of its intended designations.  In this
letter, EPA also requested that if the State wished to provide comments
on EPA’s intended designation, it should do so by October 20, 2008.
EPA stated that it would consider any additional information (e.g., on
power plants or partial county areas) provided by the state in making
final decisions on the designations.

Based on EPA's technical analysis described below, EPA designated one
Ohio county and two West Virginia counties as nonattainment for the
24-hour PM2.5 air-quality standard as part of the Steubenville
nonattainment area, based upon currently available information.

The following is a review of data for relevant factors for the EPA
Region 5 portion of the Steubenville-Weirton, Ohio-West Virginia area.

Factor 1:  Emissions data

For this factor, EPA evaluated county level emission data for the
following PM2.5 components and precursor pollutants:  “PM2.5 emissions
total,” “PM2.5 emissions carbon,” “PM2.5 emissions other,”
“SO2,” “NOx,” “VOCs,” and “NH3.”  “PM2.5 emissions
total” represents direct emissions of PM2.5 and includes: “PM2.5
emissions carbon,” “PM2.5 emissions other”, primary sulfate (SO4),
and primary nitrate.  (Although primary sulfate and primary nitrate,
which are emitted directly from stacks rather than forming in
atmospheric reactions with SO2 and NOx, are part of “PM2.5 emissions
total,” they are not shown in Table 1 as separate items).  “PM2.5
emissions carbon” represents the sum of organic carbon (OC) and
elemental carbon (EC) emissions, and “PM2.5 emissions other”
represents other inorganic particles (crustal).  Emissions of SO2 and
NOx, which are precursors of the secondary PM2.5 components sulfate and
nitrate, are also considered.  VOCs (volatile organic compounds) and NH3
(ammonia) are also potential PM2.5 precursors and are included for
consideration.

Emissions data were derived from the 2005 National Emissions Inventory
(NEI), version 1.  See
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/pm/pm25_2006_techinfo.html.

EPA also considered the Contributing Emissions Score (CES) for each
county.  The CES is a metric that takes into consideration emissions
data, meteorological data, and air quality monitoring information to
provide a relative ranking of counties in and near an area.  Note that
this metric is not the exclusive manner for considering data for these
factors.  A more detailed description can be found at
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/pm/pm25_2006_techinfo.html#C.

Table 1 shows emissions of PM2.5 and precursor pollutants components
(given in tons per year) and the CES for violating and potentially
contributing counties in the Steubenville area.  Counties that are part
of the Steubenville nonattainment area for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS are
shown in boldface.  Counties are listed in descending order by CES.

Table 1.  PM2.5 24-hour Component Emissions, and CESs

County	State Recommended Nonattainment?	CES	PM2.5

emissions

total	PM2.5

emissions

carbon	PM2.5

emissions

other	SO2

	NOx

	VOCs

	NH3

Jefferson, OH	Yes	100	11,409	722	10,686	224,025	46,158	3,693	297

Hancock, WV	Yes	60	3,781	704	3,077	2,039	4,404	2,298	830

Allegheny, PA	Other	27	5,221	2,245	2,975	51,471	63,290	46,690	2,249

Marshall, WV	No	23	4,604	309	4,295	118,021	39,932	3,230	146

Brooke, WV	Yes	19	579	192	388	1,349	2,131	3,436	210

Jefferson County, Ohio has the highest emissions in the area.  The
emissions of direct PM2.5, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides are all
large.  Jefferson County also has the highest CES, which indicates it
contributes to the area violations.  Although not shown on this table,
the emissions and CES of other nearby Ohio counties that are not part of
other areas designated nonattainment are low.

Table 2 provides the data for CES weighting factors.  The trajectory
factors are used in CES calculations to account for seasonal
meteorology.  For the top 10% of days in both the cold and warm seasons,
wind trajectories were run for a 48 hour period preceding the high
monitor reading.  The amount of time the air mass was over a county
within the mixing height was calculated.  The values were scaled so that
the maximum value is 100.  Thus, the county that is most likely to be
upwind of a monitor on a high concentration day in a season is given a
score of 100.  The scores for the other counties will reflect the
relative likelihood of being upwind.  As the concentration of a
pollutant will decrease as it goes further downwind, a distance
weighting factor is also used in calculating the CES.  The distance
factor listed on Table 2 provides the distance from the center of a
county to the center of the violating county.  If a county is violating,
the distance used is the average distance from the center to the county
line.

  Table 2.  CES Factor Data

County	CES	Trajectory Factor- Cold	Trajectory Factor- Warm	Distance (mi)

Jefferson	100	76	75	10.8

Hancock	60	76	70	13.1

Brooke	19	98	95	11.4

Allegheny	27	43	33	38.9

Marshall	23	91	95	35

Factor 2:  Air quality data

This factor considers the 24-hour PM2.5 design values (in µg/m3) for
air quality monitors in counties in the Steubenville area based on data
for the 2005-2007 period.  A monitor’s design value indicates whether
that monitor attains a specified air quality standard.  The 24-hour
PM2.5 standards are met when the 3-year average of a monitor’s 98th
percentile values are 35 µg/m3 or less.  A design value is only valid
if minimum data completeness criteria are met.

The 24-hour PM2.5 design values for counties in the Steubenville area
are shown in Table 3.  Jefferson County, Ohio has a design value which
exceeds the 2006 standards.  The two West Virginia area counties also
violate the air quality standards.  So, all three counties in the
Steubenville area have 2005-2007 design values over the standards.

	Table 3.  Air Quality Data

County	State

Recommended

 Nonattainment?	Design Values

2004-2006

	Design Values

2005-2007

Jefferson, OH	Yes	43	40

Hancock, WV	Yes	0	41

Brooke, WV	Yes	40	44

For purposes of its review, EPA used data available from the Chemical
Speciation Network and the Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual
Environments (IMPROVE) network to estimate the composition of fine
particle mass on days with the highest fine particle concentrations.
Analysis of these data indicates that the days with the highest fine
particle concentrations in the Steubenville-Weirton area occur about 86%
in the warm season and 14% in the cool season.  In the warm season, the
average chemical composition of the highest days is 75% sulfate, no
nitrate, 22% carbon, and 3% crustal.  In the cool season, the average
chemical composition of the highest days is 75% sulfate, no nitrate, 22%
carbon, and 3% crustal.  These data indicate that sources of SO2, NOx,
and direct PM2.5 emissions contribute to violations in the area.

Factor 3: Population density and degree of urbanization (including
commercial development)

Table 4 shows the 2005 population for each county in the area being
evaluated, as well as the population density for each county in that
area.  Population data gives an indication of whether it is likely that
population-based emissions might contribute to violations of the 24-hour
PM2.5 standards.

Table 4.  Population

County	State Recommended Nonattainment?	2005 Population	2005 Population
Density (pop/sq mi)

Jefferson, OH	Yes	     70,631 	172

Hancock, WV	Yes	     31,191 	354

Brooke, WV	Yes	     24,474 	265

Jefferson County, Ohio has a well larger population that both Brooke and
Hancock Counties in West Virginia.  However, the West Virginia counties
are smaller in land area which gives both counties population densities
larger that the Jefferson County population density.

Factor 4: Traffic and commuting patterns

This factor considers the number of commuters in each county who drive
to another county within the Steubenville area, the percent of total
commuters in each county who commute within the area, as well as the
total Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) for each county in millions of miles
(see Table 5).  A county with numerous commuters is generally an
integral part of an urban area and is likely contributing to fine
particle concentrations in the area.

Table 5.  Traffic and Commuting Patterns

County	State Recommended Nonattainment?	2005 VMT

(106 mi)	Number Commuting to any violating counties

	Percent

Commuting to any violating counties

	Number Commuting into statistical area 	Percent

Commuting into statistical area

Jefferson, OH	Yes	        684 	24,330 	85 	             -   	          -

Hancock, WV	Yes	        187 	12,820 	91 	             -   	          -

Brooke, WV	Yes	        210 	9,320 	89 	             -   	          -

The listing of counties on Table 5 reflects a ranking based on the
number of people commuting to violating counties.  The commuting in the
statistical area figures were not available in the Steubenville-Weirton
area.  All listed counties are in the nonattainment area for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS.  All three area counties are in violation of the air
quality standards, so commuting to any area county is commuting to a
violating county.  All three Steubenville area counties have a fair
percent of commuting to violating counties.

Note:  The 2005 VMT data used for tables 5 and 6 of the technical
analysis have been derived using methodology such as that described in
"Documentation for the 2005 Mobile National Emissions Inventory, Version
2," December 2008, prepared for the Emission Inventory Group, U.S. EPA.
This document may be found at:   HYPERLINK
"ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005_nei/mobile_sector/documentation/20
05_mobile_nei_version_2_report.pdf"
ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005_nei/mobile_sector/documentation/200
5_mobile_nei_version_2_report.pdf .

Factor 5:  Growth rates and patterns

This factor considers population growth for 2000-2005 and growth in
vehicle miles traveled for 1996-2005 for counties in Steubenville area,
as well as patterns of population and VMT growth.  A county with rapid
population or VMT growth is generally an integral part of an urban area
and likely to be contributing to fine particle concentrations in the
area.

Table 6 below shows population, population growth, VMT, and VMT growth
for counties that are included in the Steubenville area.  Counties are
listed in descending order based on VMT growth between 1996 and 2005.

Table 6.  Population and VMT Growth and Percent Change

County	Population (2005)	Population % change (2000-2005)	2005 VMT

(106 mi)	VMT

% change

(1996-2005)

Brooke, WV	     24,474 	-4	        210 	            0

Jefferson, OH	     70,631 	-4	        684 	           -6

Hancock, WV	     31,191 	-4	        187 	         -32

Jefferson County, Ohio joined the West Virginia counties in experiencing
a population decline from 2000 to 2005.  The VMT declined in Jefferson
County, but not nearly as sharply as the 32% decline in Hancock County,
West Virginia.  The VMT was unchanged for Brooke County, West Virginia
for the 1996 to 2005 period.

Factor 6:  Meteorology (weather/transport patterns)

For this factor, EPA considered data from National Weather Service
instruments and other meteorological monitoring sites in the area.  Wind
direction and wind speed data for 2005-2007 were analyzed, with an
emphasis on “high PM2.5 days” for each of two seasons, an
October-April “cold” season and a May-September “warm” season.
These high days are defined as days where any FRM or FEM air quality
monitors had 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations above 95% on a frequency
distribution curve of PM2.5 24-hour values.

For each air quality monitoring site, EPA developed a “pollution
rose” to understand the prevailing wind direction and wind speed on
the days with highest fine particle concentrations.  The figure
identifies 24-hour PM2.5 values by color; days exceeding 35 μg/m3 are
denoted with a red or black icon.  A dot indicates the day occurred in
the warm season; a triangle indicates the day occurred in the cool
season.  The center of the figure indicates the location of the air
quality monitoring site, and the location of the icon in relation to the
center indicates the direction from which the wind was blowing on that
day.  An icon that is close to the center indicates a low average wind
speed on that day.  Higher wind speeds are indicated when the icon is
further away from the center.

The pollution rose for the Steubenville area is provided as Figure 2.
Winds on high concentration days show a tendency to come from the
Southwest to Southeast.  There are several large sources in the
Steubenville area generally South of Brooke County, West Virginia, where
the pollution rose was based.  Overall, the winds come from a variety of
directions.  So, it is appropriate to consider counties in all
directions from the violations.

Figure 2

Note:  the meteorology factor is also considered in each county’s
Contributing Emissions Score because the method for deriving this metric
included an analysis of trajectories of air masses for high PM2.5 days.

Factor 7:  Geography/topography (mountain ranges or other air basin
boundaries)

The geography/topography analysis evaluates the physical features of the
land that might have an effect on the air shed and, therefore, on the
distribution of PM2.5 over the area.

The Steubenville area does not have any geographical or topographical
barriers significantly limiting air-pollution transport within its air
shed.  Therefore, this factor did not play a significant role in the
decision-making process.

Factor 8:  Jurisdictional boundaries

In evaluating the jurisdictional boundary factor, EPA gave special
consideration to areas that were already designated nonattainment in
2005 for violating the 1997 fine particle standards.  Analysis of
chemical composition data in these areas indicates that the same
components that make up most of the PM2.5 mass in the area on an annual
average basis such as sulfate and direct PM2.5 carbon in many eastern
areas also are key contributors to the PM2.5 mass on days exceeding the
24-hour PM2.5 standard.  These data indicate that in many cities, the
same source categories that contribute to violations of the annual
standard also contribute to exceedances of the 24-hour standard.

EPA has generally concluded that counties that were designated as having
emissions sources contributing to fine particle concentrations which
exceeded the 1997 standards (all areas violated the annual standard, two
also violated the previous 24-hour standard) also contribute to fine
particle concentrations on the highest days.  For this reason, EPA
believes that for most existing nonattainment areas, the nonattainment
area for the 2006 24-hour standard should be the same.  Consideration
also should be given to existing boundaries and organizations as they
may facilitate air quality planning and the implementation of control
measures to attain the standard.  Areas already designated as
nonattainment represent important boundaries for state air quality
planning.

The Brooke-Hancock-Jefferson Metropolitan Planning Commission (BHJMPC)
is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for Jefferson County,
OH.  BHJMPC website: http://www.bhjmpc.org/

The Steubenville-Weirton ozone maintenance area consists of Jefferson
County in Ohio and Brooke and Hancock Counties in West Virginia.  The
Steubenville-Weirton nonattainment area under the 2006 standards is
identical to the nonattainment area designated under the 1997 PM2.5
standard.

Factor 9:  Level of control of emission sources

Under this factor, the existing level of control of emission sources is
taken into consideration.  The emissions data used by EPA in this
technical analysis and provided in Table 1 under Factor 1 represent
emissions levels taking into account any control strategies implemented
in the Steubenville area before 2005 on stationary, mobile, and area
sources.  Data are presented for PM2.5 components that are directly
emitted, carbonaceous PM2.5 and crustal PM2.5, and for pollutants which
react in the atmosphere to form fine particles such as SO2, NOx, VOC,
and ammonia.

In considering county-level emissions, EPA used data from the 2005
National Emissions Inventory, the most updated version of the national
inventory available at the beginning of the designations process in late
2007.  However, EPA recognized that for certain counties, emissions may
have changed since 2005.  For example, certain power plants or large
sources of emissions in or near this area may have installed emission
controls or otherwise significantly reduced emissions since 2005.  Some
States provided updated information on emissions and emission controls
in their comments to EPA.  EPA considered such additional information in
making final designation decisions.

With regard to nearby power plants, EPA considered information about
whether a specific plant installed federally enforceable emission
controls by December 2008 resulting in significant emissions reductions.
 A control requirement is considered to be federally-enforceable if it
is required by a State regulation adopted in a State implementation
plan, if it is included in a federally-enforceable Title V operating
permit, or if it is required by a consent decree which also requires the
controls to be included in federally enforceable permit upon termination
of the consent decree.  In making final decisions, EPA also considered
whether a facility would continue to emit pollutants which contribute to
PM2.5 exceedances even after emission controls are operational.

Ohio provided information regarding other power plants in Jefferson
County.  Considering the emission control devices currently operating
the emissions remain high.  Additional controls are planned.  The
planned controls may improve the air quality in the future.
Designations are based on current air quality and information.
Jefferson County, Ohio has a design value exceeding the standard and it
emissions remain large.

EPA Technical Analysis for Youngstown-Warren-East Liverpool,
Ohio-Pennsylvania

The Youngstown area is designated attainment under the 1997 standards.
However, monitoring indicates a violation of the 2006 standards in
Mahoning County, Ohio.  Trumbull County had shown a 2004-2006 violation,
but data indicates it meets the standards in 2005-2007.  There are four
counties in the combined statistical area: Columbiana, Mahoning, and
Trumbull Counties in Ohio and Mercer County, Pennsylvania.  Ohio
originally recommended Mahoning and Trumbull Counties as nonattainment,
although Ohio subsequently recommended that the area be designated
attainment based on 2006 to 2008 data.  EPA analyzed these and other
nearby counties.  Many of the nearby counties are in other metropolitan
areas and thus were evaluated as part of those other areas.

EPA agrees with the State’s original recommendations.  Within the
Youngstown area, the greatest emissions and the greatest likely local
contribution to the violations in the area are in Mahoning and Trumbull
counties.  Columbiana County emissions are moderate but are
substantially lower than those of Mahoning and Trumbull Counties.
Columbiana County is also excluded from the 8-hour ozone maintenance
area.

EPA is providing an opportunity for states to quality assure, submit,
and certify air quality data for 2008, which may indicate that areas
like the Youngstown area warrant a different designation based on 2006
to 2008 data than EPA is applying based on 2005 to 2007 data.  However,
EPA cannot use 2006 to 2008 data as the basis for designations until
such time and monitoring data for the full year is available, quality
assured, submitted, and certified.  Therefore, for now, EPA must base
the designations it promulgates on 2005 to 2007 data.  Since those data
indicate a violation, EPA must designate the Youngstown area as
nonattainment.

As noted earlier, Youngstown is near several other urban areas,
including Cleveland, Canton, and Steubenville.  However, EPA views these
areas as sufficiently distinct to warrant treatment as separate
nonattainment areas.  Regarding the counties that are not being included
in other nonattainment areas, EPA finds that emissions of these counties
are relatively low, and no other factor warrants their inclusion in the
nonattainment area.

Figure 1 is a map of the counties in the nonattainment area and other
relevant information such as the locations and design values of air
quality monitors, and the metropolitan area boundary.

 Figure 1

In its December 17, 2007 letter, Ohio recommended the Mahoning and
Trumbull Counties be designated as “nonattainment” for the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 standard based on air quality data from 2004-2006.  These
data are from Federal Reference Method (FRM) monitors located in the
state.

In August 2008, EPA notified Ohio of its intended designations.  In this
letter, EPA also requested that if the State wished to provide comments
on EPA’s intended designation, it should do so by October 20, 2008.
EPA stated that it would consider any additional information (e.g., on
power plants or partial county areas) provided by the state in making
final decisions on the designations.  In a letter dated October 8, 2008,
Ohio revised its recommendation based on consideration of 2008 data.

Based on EPA's technical analysis described below, EPA is designating
two Ohio counties as nonattainment for the 24-hour PM2.5 air-quality
standard as part of the Youngstown nonattainment area, based upon
currently available information.

The following is a review of data for relevant factors for the Ohio
portion of the Youngstown, Ohio-Pennsylvania area.

Factor 1:  Emissions data

For this factor, EPA evaluated county level emission data for the
following PM2.5 components and precursor pollutants:  “PM2.5 emissions
total,” “PM2.5 emissions carbon,” “PM2.5 emissions other,”
“SO2,” “NOx,” “VOCs,” and “NH3.”  “PM2.5 emissions
total” represents direct emissions of PM2.5 and includes: “PM2.5
emissions carbon,” “PM2.5 emissions other”, primary sulfate (SO4),
and primary nitrate.  (Although primary sulfate and primary nitrate,
which are emitted directly from stacks rather than forming in
atmospheric reactions with SO2 and NOx, are part of “PM2.5 emissions
total,” they are not shown in Table 1 as separate items).  “PM2.5
emissions carbon” represents the sum of organic carbon (OC) and
elemental carbon (EC) emissions, and “PM2.5 emissions other”
represents other inorganic particles (crustal).  Emissions of SO2 and
NOx, which are precursors of the secondary PM2.5 components sulfate and
nitrate, are also considered.  VOCs (volatile organic compounds) and NH3
(ammonia) are also potential PM2.5 precursors and are included for
consideration.

Emissions data were derived from the 2005 National Emissions Inventory
(NEI), version 1.  See
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/pm/pm25_2006_techinfo.html.

EPA also considered the Contributing Emissions Score (CES) for each
county.  The CES is a metric that takes into consideration emissions
data, meteorological data, and air quality monitoring information to
provide a relative ranking of counties in and near an area.  Note that
this metric is not the exclusive manner for considering data for these
factors.  A more detailed description can be found at
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/pm/pm25_2006_techinfo.html#C.

Table 1 shows emissions of PM2.5 and precursor pollutants components
(given in tons per year) and the CES for violating and potentially
contributing counties in the Youngstown area.  Counties that are part of
the Youngstown nonattainment area for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS are shown in
boldface.  Counties are listed in descending order by CES.

Table 1.  PM2.5 24-hour Component Emissions, and CESs

County	State Recommended Nonattainment?	CES	PM2.5

emissions

total	PM2.5

emissions

carbon	PM2.5

emissions

other	SO2

	NOx

	VOCs

	NH3

Jefferson, OH	Other	100	11,409	722	10,686	224,025	46,158	3,693	297

Trumbull, OH	Yes	89	1,730	625	1,105	18,501	13,373	12,098	881

Beaver, PA	Other	43	2,909	451	2,457	45,452	33,400	7,424	450

Lawrence, PA	Other	40	2,046	313	1,733	22,900	9,001	4,234	692

Mahoning, OH	Yes	34	722	338	384	1,927	10,086	10,416	1,415

Portage, OH	Other	18	1,011	496	514	548	7,269	8,365	564

Columbiana, OH	No	14	805	366	441	525	4,377	4,933	1,956

Mercer, PA	No	11	793	290	503	1,042	6,010	7,028	1,210

Mahoning and Trumbull Counties have the highest emissions and CES in the
Youngstown area.  The table indicates counties recommended as
nonattainment for other areas have CES in the same range as Mahoning and
Trumbull Counties.  However, Jefferson County is in Steubenville-Weirton
area.  Beaver and Lawrence Counties in Pennsylvania are in the
Pittsburgh area and Portage County, Ohio is in the Cleveland area.
Within the Youngstown area, the emissions and CES from Columbiana
County, Ohio and Mercer County, Pennsylvania are substantially smaller
than Mahoning and Trumbull Counties.

Table 2 provides the data for CES weighting factors.  The trajectory
factors are used in CES calculations to account for seasonal
meteorology.  For the top 10% of days in both the cold and warm seasons,
wind trajectories were run for a 48 hour period preceding the high
monitor reading.  The amount of time the air mass was over a county
within the mixing height was calculated.  The values were scaled so that
the maximum value is 100.  Thus, the county that is most likely to be
upwind of a monitor on a high concentration day in a season is given a
score of 100.  The scores for the other counties will reflect the
relative likelihood of being upwind.  As the concentration of a
pollutant will decrease as it goes further downwind, a distance
weighting factor is also used in calculating the CES.  The distance
factor listed on Table 2 provides the distance from the center of a
county to the center of the violating county.  If a county is violating,
the distance used is the average distance from the center to the county
line.

  Table 2.  CES Factor Data

County	CES	Trajectory Factor- Cold	Trajectory Factor- Warm	Distance (mi)

Jefferson, OH	100	41	80	44.2

Trumbull, OH	89	88	74	20.7

Beaver, PA	43	56	93	33

Lawrence, PA	40	78	98	23.1

Mahoning, OH	34	100	98	11.3

Portage, OH	18	71	52	25.1

Columbiana, OH	14	76	100	18.2

Mercer, PA	11	60	71	31.8

Factor 2:  Air quality data

This factor considers the 24-hour PM2.5 design values (in µg/m3) for
air quality monitors in counties in the Youngstown area based on data
for the 2005-2007 period.  A monitor’s design value indicates whether
that monitor attains a specified air quality standard.  The 24-hour
PM2.5 standards are met when the 3-year average of a monitor’s 98th
percentile values are 35 µg/m3 or less.  A design value is only valid
if minimum data completeness criteria are met.

The 24-hour PM2.5 design values for counties in the Youngstown area are
shown in Table 3.  Mahoning County, Ohio is in violation of the 2006
PM2.5 air quality standards.  Trumbull County, Ohio had a 2004-2006
design value above the standard, but its 2005-2007 design value shows it
now meets the standards.  There is no air quality data for Columbiana
County, Ohio and Mercer County, Pennsylvania.  There are violations in
nearby counties that are in other nonattainment areas.  However, the
absence of a violating monitor alone is not a sufficient reason to
eliminate counties as candidates for nonattainment status.  Each county
has been evaluated based on the weight of evidence of the nine factors
and other relevant information.

	Table 3.  Air Quality Data

County	State

Recommended

 Nonattainment?	Design Values

2004-2006

	Design Values

2005-2007

Trumbull, OH	Yes	36	35

Mahoning, OH	Yes	37	36

Columbiana, OH	No	0	0

Mercer, PA	No

Jefferson, OH	Other	43	40

Beaver, PA	Other	45	43

Lawrence, PA	Other	0	0

Portage, OH	Other	34	35

For purposes of its review, EPA used data available from the Chemical
Speciation Network and the Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual
Environments (IMPROVE) network to estimate the composition of fine
particle mass on days with the highest fine particle concentrations.
Analysis of these data indicates that the days with the highest fine
particle concentrations in the Youngstown area occur about 63% in the
warm season and 38% in the cool season.  In the warm season, the average
chemical composition of the highest days is 70% sulfate, no nitrate, 24%
carbon, and 6% crustal.  In the cool season, the average chemical
composition of the highest days is 26% sulfate, 29% nitrate, 37% carbon,
and 7% crustal.  These data indicate that sources of SO2, NOx, and
direct PM2.5 emissions contribute to violations in the area.

Factor 3: Population density and degree of urbanization (including
commercial development)

Table 4 shows the 2005 population for each county in the area being
evaluated, as well as the population density for each county in that
area.  Population data gives an indication of whether it is likely that
population-based emissions might contribute to violations of the 24-hour
PM2.5 standards.

Table 4.  Population

County	State Recommended Nonattainment?	2005 Population	2005 Population
Density (pop/mi2)

Trumbull, OH	Yes	    218,672 	345

Mahoning, OH	Yes	    253,181 	599

Columbiana, OH	No	    110,636 	207

Mercer, PA	No	    119,115 	175

Jefferson, OH	Other	     70,631 	172

Beaver, PA	Other	    176,825 	399

Lawrence, PA	Other	     92,412 	255

Portage, OH	Other	    155,150 	307

Mahoning and Trumbull Counties are the largest counties in the area.
Columbiana and Mercer Counties each have about half the population of
the larger two counties.  The population density statistics reinforce
this as Mahoning and Trumbull Counties densities are well larger that
the densities of Columbiana and Mercer Counties.

Factor 4: Traffic and commuting patterns

This factor considers the number of commuters in each county who drive
to another county within the Youngstown area, the percent of total
commuters in each county who commute within or to the area, as well as
the total Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) for each county in millions of
miles (see Table 5).  A county with numerous commuters is generally an
integral part of an urban area and is likely contributing to fine
particle concentrations in the area.

Table 5.  Traffic and Commuting Patterns

County	State Recommended Nonattainment?	2005 VMT

(106 mi)	Number Commuting to any violating counties	Percent

Commuting to any violating counties 	Number Commuting within/to
statistical area 	Percent

Commuting within/to statistical area

Mahoning, OH	Yes	    2,666 	99,310 	91 	    100,200 	          92

Trumbull, OH	Yes	    2,153 	85,820 	88 	      85,870 	          88

Mercer, PA	No	    1,302 	44,370 	87 	      44,270 	          87

Columbiana, OH	No	       872 	16,360 	33 	      39,050 	          79

Lawrence, PA	Other	       769 	7,390 	18 	        4,730 	          12

Portage, OH	Other	    1,788 	35,070 	45	2,250	3

Beaver, PA	Other	    1,522 	48,250 	60 	           970 	            1

Jefferson, OH	Other	       684 	21,140 	74 	           730
3

Ashtabula, OH	No	    1,182 	720 	2 	           670 	            2

Stark, OH	Other	    3,049 	141,890 	80 	        1,980 	            1

The listing of counties on Table 5 reflects a ranking based on the
number of people commuting to other counties.  The four Youngstown area
counties have a fair amount of commuting within the statistical area.
Columbiana County, Ohio has a moderate amount of commuting to any
violating county.  The other three Youngstown area counties have more
workers commuting to and a higher percent of commuting into any
violating county.  There is little commuting from other Ohio counties
into the Youngstown area.  This includes the minimal commuting from
Ashtabula and Stark Counties which are adjacent to the Youngstown area.
Thus, these data support treating Canton and Cleveland as separate urban
areas.

Note:  The 2005 VMT data used for tables 5 and 6 of the technical
analysis have been derived using methodology such as that described in
"Documentation for the 2005 Mobile National Emissions Inventory, Version
2," December 2008, prepared for the Emission Inventory Group, U.S. EPA.
This document may be found at:   HYPERLINK
"ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005_nei/mobile_sector/documentation/20
05_mobile_nei_version_2_report.pdf"
ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2005_nei/mobile_sector/documentation/200
5_mobile_nei_version_2_report.pdf .

Factor 5:  Growth rates and patterns

This factor considers population growth for 2000-2005 and growth in
vehicle miles traveled for 1996-2005 for counties in Youngstown area, as
well as patterns of population and VMT growth.  A county with rapid
population or VMT growth is generally an integral part of an urban area
and likely to be contributing to fine particle concentrations in the
area.

Table 6 below shows population, population growth, VMT, and VMT growth
for counties that are included in the Youngstown area.  Counties are
listed in descending order based on VMT growth between 1996 and 2005.

Table 6.  Population and VMT Growth and Percent Change

County	Population (2005)	Population % change (2000-05)	2005 VMT

(106 mi)	VMT

% change

(1996-2005)

Mahoning, OH	    253,181 	-2	     2,666 	            9

Trumbull, OH	    218,672 	-3	     2,153 	            8

Portage, OH	    155,150 	2 	     1,788 	            6

Mercer, PA	    119,115 	-1	     1,302 	            0

Beaver, PA	    176,825 	-2	     1,522 	            0

Lawrence, PA	     92,412 	-2	        769 	           -1

Columbiana, OH	    110,636 	-1	        872 	           -2

Jefferson, OH	     70,631 	-4	        684 	           -6

The population for most counties near Youngtown has been slightly
declining from 2000 to 2005.  The exception is a 2% population gain in
Portage County, Ohio.  Mahoning and Trumbull Counties, Ohio had the
highest VMT growth in the area.  Portage County, Ohio, in the Cleveland
area, also had VMT growth.  The other counties had either no change or a
decrease in VMT during the 1996-2005 period.

Factor 6:  Meteorology (weather/transport patterns)

For this factor, EPA considered data from National Weather Service
instruments and other meteorological monitoring sites in the area.  Wind
direction and wind speed data for 2005-2007 were analyzed, with an
emphasis on “high PM2.5 days” for each of two seasons, an
October-April “cold” season and a May-September “warm” season.
These high days are defined as days where any FRM or FEM air quality
monitors had 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations above 95% on a frequency
distribution curve of PM2.5 24-hour values.

For each air quality monitoring site, EPA developed a “pollution
rose” to understand the prevailing wind direction and wind speed on
the days with highest fine particle concentrations.  The figure
identifies 24-hour PM2.5 values by color; days exceeding 35 μg/m3 are
denoted with a red or black icon.  A dot indicates the day occurred in
the warm season; a triangle indicates the day occurred in the cool
season.  The center of the figure indicates the location of the air
quality monitoring site, and the location of the icon in relation to the
center indicates the direction from which the wind was blowing on that
day.  An icon that is close to the center indicates a low average wind
speed on that day.  Higher wind speeds are indicated when the icon is
further away from the center.

The pollution rose for the Youngstown area is provided as Figure 2.
Winds on high concentration days show a slight tendency to come from the
South to Southeast.  Pittsburg, Pennsylvania is well to the Southeast
and other nonattainment areas are well to the South.  These areas may be
part of the regional background.  Overall, the winds come from a variety
of directions.  So, it is appropriate to consider counties in all
directions from the violations.

Figure 2

Note:  the meteorology factor is also considered in each county’s
Contributing Emissions Score because the method for deriving this metric
included an analysis of trajectories of air masses for high PM2.5 days.

Factor 7:  Geography/topography (mountain ranges or other air basin
boundaries)

The geography/topography analysis evaluates the physical features of the
land that might have an effect on the air shed and, therefore, on the
distribution of PM2.5 over the area.

The Youngstown area does not have any geographical or topographical
barriers significantly limiting air-pollution transport within its air
shed.  Therefore, this factor did not play a significant role in the
decision-making process.

Factor 8:  Jurisdictional boundaries

In evaluating the jurisdictional boundary factor, EPA gave special
consideration to areas that were already designated nonattainment in
2005 for violating the 1997 fine particle standards.  However, this area
was designated attainment for the 1997 standards, so nonattainment area
boundaries for the 1997 standards were not a factor in determining this
area’s boundaries.

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

@

@

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

@

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

@

@

!

D

E

|

}

~

–

—

¨

©

À

Á

Â

à

á

æ

ç

ö

÷

3

7

!

*

4

=

E

@

@

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

E

N

X

a

i

~

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

@

—

ž

©

¯

¶

Á

@

@

Á

Â

á

ç

ù

@

@

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

@

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

@

@

@

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

@

@

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

ˆ

3

-

"̤̀옍)

Ȁ␷㠀$⑈愀̤摧奤G"̀Ĥ옍)

愀̤摧䎾R"̤̀옍)

옍)

"̤̀옍)

愀̤摧䎾R"̤̀옍)

옍)

"̤̀옍)

옍)

b	\

b	\

b	\

b	\

b	\

옍)

옍)

옍)

"̤̀옍)

옍)

Ȁ摧奤G"̤̀옍)

愀̤摧䎾R"̤̀옍)

@

摧䎾R"̤̀옍)

옍)

옍)

옍)

옍)

옍)

"̤̀옍)

愀Ĥ摧䎾R"̤̀옍)

옍)

"̤̀옍)

옍)

@

愀̤摧䎾R"̤̀옍)

옍)

옍)

@

옍)

옍)

옍)

옍)

„

«

)

,

m

p

–

™

„

…

ª

«

"̤̀옍)

愀̤摧䭐ð"̤̀옍)

옍)

愀̤摧䭐ð"̤̀옍)

kd

愀̤摧䭐ð"̤̀옍)

옍)

\

\

옍)

옍)

옍)

옍)

옍)

옍#

옍)

Ȁ摧奤G"̤̀옍)

愀̤摧䎾R"̤̀옍)

愀̤摧䎾R"̤̀옍)

옍)

kdë

b	¶

b	¶

@

b	¶

옍)

b	\

옍)

옍)

옍)

"̤̀옍)

愀̤摧業+"̤̀옍)

옍)

晆⽡"̤̀옍)

愀̤摧業+"̤̀옍)

옍)

옍)

옍)

옍)

"

.

/

F

I

d

e

}

€

›

œ

³

¶

Ñ

Ò

ë

î

!

9

<

X

Z

"

.

옍)

ਁ氃愀϶v瑹業+̀F

I

V

d

ਁ氃愀϶v瑹業+̀}

€

›

ਁ氃愀϶v瑹業+̀³

¶

Ã

Ñ

ਁ氃愀϶v瑹業+̀ë

î

û

ਁ氃愀϶v瑹業+̀9

<

I

X

+Z

옍)

옍)

"̤̀옍)

愀̤摧䎾R"̤̀옍)

옍)

"̤̀옍)

愀̤摧䎾R"̤̀옍)

옍)

"̤̀옍)

@

옍)

옍)

옍)

옍)

옍#

옍)

"̤̀옍)

愀̤摧䎾R"̤̀옍)

옍)

"̤̀옍)

@

愀̤摧䎾R"̤̀옍)

@

옍)

옍)

옍)

옍)

옍)

"̤̀옍)

愀̤摧䎾R"̤̀옍)

옍)

"̤̀옍)

愀̤摧䎾R"̤̀옍)

옍)

옍)

옍)

옍)

"

(

4

<

@

P

_

`

n

q

|

„

”

£

¤

¤

®

´

¿

È

Ì

Û

ê

ë

ì

옍)

옍)

옍)

㜀$␸䠀$摧泑UᔀThe Eastgate Regional Council of Governments
(Eastgate) is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for Mahoning
and Trumbull Counties in Ohio.  The Eastgate webpage is found at
HYPERLINK "http://www.eastgatecog.org/"  http://www.eastgatecog.org/ .
The Northeast Ohio Area wide Coordinating Agency (NOACA) is the
Cleveland MPO for Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake (Ohio), Lorain, and Medina
Counties.

The Youngstown ozone maintenance area consists of Columbiana, Mahoning,
and Trumbull in Ohio and Mercer in Pennsylvania.

Factor 9:  Level of control of emission sources

Under this factor, the existing level of control of emission sources is
taken into consideration.  The emissions data used by EPA in this
technical analysis and provided in Table 1 under Factor 1 represent
emissions levels taking into account any control strategies implemented
in the Youngstown area before 2005 on stationary, mobile, and area
sources.  Data are presented for PM2.5 components that are directly
emitted, carbonaceous PM2.5 and crustal PM2.5, and for pollutants which
react in the atmosphere to form fine particles such as SO2, NOx, VOC,
and ammonia.

In considering county-level emissions, EPA used data from the 2005
National Emissions Inventory, the most updated version of the national
inventory available at the beginning of the designations process in late
2007.  However, EPA recognized that for certain counties, emissions may
have changed since 2005.  For example, certain power plants or large
sources of emissions in or near this area may have installed emission
controls or otherwise significantly reduced emissions since 2005.  Some
States provided updated information on emissions and emission controls
in their comments to EPA.  EPA considered such additional information in
making final designation decisions.

With regard to nearby power plants, EPA considered information about
whether a specific plant installed federally enforceable emission
controls by December 2008 resulting in significant emissions reductions.
 A control requirement is considered to be federally-enforceable if it
is required by a State regulation adopted in a State implementation
plan, if it is included in a federally-enforceable Title V operating
permit, or if it is required by a consent decree which also requires the
controls to be included in federally enforceable permit upon termination
of the consent decree.  In making final decisions, EPA also considered
whether a facility would continue to emit pollutants which contribute to
PM2.5 exceedances even after emission controls are operational.

Ohio did not provide other information regarding power plants or any
other large sources in the Youngstown area.

 EPA designated nonattainment areas for the 1997 fine particle standards
in 2005.  In 2006, the 24-hour PM2.5 standard was revised from 65
micrograms per cubic meter (average of 98th percentile values for 3
consecutive years) to 35 micrograms per cubic meter; the level of the
annual standard for PM2.5 remained unchanged at 15 micrograms per cubic
meter (average of annual averages for 3 consecutive years).