[Federal Register: December 29, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 249)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 77026-77042]
[DOCID:fr29de05-5]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R05-OAR-2005-IN-0006; FRL-8015-7]

Determination of Attainment, Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning
Purposes; Indiana; Redesignation of the Evansville Area To Attainment
of the 8-Hour Ozone Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is determining that the Evansville 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area (Evansville area) has attained the 8-hour ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The Evansville area
includes Vanderburgh and Warrick Counties. EPA is approving a request
from the State of Indiana, submitted on June 2, 2005, to redesignate
the Evansville area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. EPA's approval of the redesignation request is based on
the determination that the Evansville area and the State of Indiana
have met the criteria for redesignation to attainment set forth in the
Clean Air Act (CAA), including the determination that the Evansville
area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard. In conjunction with this
approval, EPA is approving the State's plan for maintaining the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS in the Evansville area through 2015 as a revision to the
Indiana State Implementation Plan (SIP). EPA also finds as adequate and
approves the 2015 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) and Nitrogen Oxides
(NOX) Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEBs) for the
Evansville area contained in the Evansville area ozone maintenance
plan.

DATES: This rule is effective on January 30, 2006.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2005-IN-0006. All documents in the docket are listed on
the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
Federal holidays. We recommend that you telephone Edward Doty,
Environmental Scientist, at<PHONE_NUMBER> before visiting the Region 5
office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edward Doty, Environmental Scientist,
Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the following, whenever ``we,'' ``us,''
or ``our'' are used, we mean the United States Environmental Protection
Agency.

Table of Contents

I. What Is the Background for This Rule?
II. What Actions Are We Taking and When Are They Effective?
    A. Determination of Attainment and Redesignation of the
Evansville Area To Attainment of the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
    B. Approval of Indiana's Ozone Maintenance Plan for the
Evansville Area
    C. Approval and Finding of Adequacy of VOC and NOX
Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for the Evansville Area
    D. Effective Date of These Actions
III. Why Are We Taking These Actions?
IV. What Are the Effects of These Actions?
V. What Comments Did We Receive and What Are Our Responses?
VI. What Are Our Final Actions?
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Review

I. What Is the Background for This Rule?

    EPA has determined that ground-level ozone is detrimental to human
health. On July 18, 1997, the EPA promulgated an 8-hour ozone NAAQS (62
FR 38856) of 0.08 parts per million parts of air (0.08 ppm). This
standard is violated in an area when any ozone monitor in the area
records an average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour
ozone concentrations equaling or exceeding 0.085 ppm over a three-year
period. Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather,
emitted VOC and NOX react in the presence of sunlight to
form ground-level ozone along with other secondary compounds. VOC and
NOX are referred to as ``ozone precursors.''
    In accordance with section 107(d) of the CAA as amended in 1977,
EPA designated the Evansville area (Vanderburgh and Warrick Counties)
as an ozone nonattainment area for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on
ozone data collected in this area during the 2001-2003 period. The
Federal Register notice making this designation was signed on April 15,
2004, and was published on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857).
    The Clean Air Act contains two sets of provisions--subpart 1 and
subpart 2--that address planning and emission control requirements for
nonattainment areas (both subparts are found in title I, part D of the
CAA). Subpart 1 contains general, less prescriptive requirements for
nonattainment areas governed by any NAAQS, and applies to all
nonattainment areas. Subpart 2 contains more specific requirements for
certain ozone nonattainment areas, and applies to ozone nonattainment
areas classified under section 181 of the CAA.
    In the April 30, 2004 ozone designation rulemaking, EPA divided 8-
hour ozone nonattainment areas into the categories of subpart 1
nonattainment and subpart 2 nonattainment based on their 8-hour ozone
design values (i.e., the three-year average annual fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hour ozone concentrations at the worst-case ozone monitoring
sites in the designated areas) and their 1-hour ozone design values
(i.e., the fourth-highest daily maximum 1-hour ozone concentrations
over the three-year period at the worst-case monitoring sites in the
designated areas).\1\ 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas with 1-hour
ozone design values equaling or exceeding 0.121 ppm were designated as
classified nonattainment areas (as nonattainment areas required to meet
the requirements of subpart 2 of the CAA). All other 8-hour
nonattainment areas were designated as ``basic'' nonattainment areas
subject only to the requirements of subpart 1 of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The 1-hour ozone standard, 0.12 ppm, has been replaced by
the 8-hour ozone standard, with the 1-hour ozone standard being
revoked on June 15, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the April 30, 2004 designation rulemaking, the Evansville area
was designated as nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone standard, and was
identified as a subpart 1 basic nonattainment area. This designation
was based on ozone data collected in the Evansville area during the
period of 2001-2003.
    On June 2, 2005, the State of Indiana requested redesignation of
the

Evansville area to attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on ozone
data collected during the period of 2002-2004. This redesignation
request also included a 10-year ozone maintenance plan for the
Evansville area and VOC and NOX MVEBs for the Evansville
area based on emission projections in the ozone maintenance plan.
    On September 9, 2005, EPA published a proposed rule (70 FR 53605),
proposing to: (1) Determine that the Evansville area has attained the
8-hour ozone NAAQS and to approve Indiana's request to redesignate the
Evansville area to attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS; (2) approve
Indiana's ozone maintenance plan for the Evansville area; and (3)
approve the 2015 VOC and NOX MVEBs for the Evansville area
and notify the public that these MVEBs are adequate for purposes of
transportation conformity. This proposed rule established a 30-day
public comment period. EPA received several requests for a hearing and
for extension of the comment period on the proposed rule. EPA denied
the requests for the hearing, stating it believed that the opportunity
to submit written comments provided an adequate opportunity for public
input. EPA did, however, grant a seven-day extension to the public
comment period. See 70 FR 58167 (October 5, 2005).

II. What Actions Are We Taking and When Are They Effective?

    After consideration of the comments received in response to the
September 9, 2005 proposed rule, as described in section V below, and
the State's final adopted SIP revision and supporting material
(reviewed in detail in the September 9, 2005 proposed rule), we are
taking the following actions:

A. Determination of Attainment and Redesignation of the Evansville Area
To Attainment of the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS

    In the September 9, 2005 proposed rule (70 FR 53605), EPA proposed
to determine that the Evansville area had attained the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS and to approve Indiana's request to redesignate this area to
attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. These proposed actions were based
on ozone data from the period of 2002-2004 and on the State's
demonstration that the criteria for redesignation to attainment, as
specified in section 107 of the Clean Air Act, had been satisfied. EPA
has reviewed the ambient monitoring data for ozone consistent with the
requirements contained in 40 CFR part 58 and recorded in EPA's
Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS) for the Evansville area
for both the 2002-2004 ozone seasons and the 2003-2005 \2\ ozone
seasons. On the basis of this review, EPA has determined that the area
has attained the 8-hour ozone standard. Review of the ozone data, the
State's submissions, and the public comments for and against the
redesignation (see section V below) lead us to the conclusion that: (1)
The Evansville ozone nonattainment area has attained the 8-hour ozone
standard; and (2) the State of Indiana has met the criteria for
redesignation of the Evansville area to attainment of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. Therefore, in this final rule, we are finalizing our
determination of attainment, and we are approving Indiana's request for
redesignation of the Evansville area to attainment of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The 2005 ozone data have not been entered into AIRS, but
have been quality assured by the State. The State has submitted a
summary of the peak 2005 8-hour ozone concentrations at the request
of the EPA to respond to public comments addressed in this final
rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The State must continue to operate an appropriate ozone monitoring
network, in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, to verify the attainment
status of the Evansville area. The air quality data relied on to
determine that the area continues to attain the ozone NAAQS must be
consistent with 40 CFR part 58 requirements and other relevant EPA
guidance and must be recorded in EPA's AIRS.

B. Approval of Indiana's Ozone Maintenance Plan for the Evansville Area

    EPA is approving Indiana's plan for maintaining the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS in the Evansville area through 2015 as a revision to the Indiana
SIP. The maintenance plan meets the requirements of sections 175A and
107(d) of the Clean Air Act. The adopted maintenance plan contains
triggering mechanisms and contingency measures designed to promptly
correct (or prevent) a violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS occurring
after redesignation of the Evansville area to attainment of the NAAQS.
Section 175A of the Clean Air Act requires that a maintenance plan
include such contingency measures as EPA deems necessary to assure that
the State will promptly correct a violation of the NAAQS that occurs
after redesignation.
    The contingency measures listed in the adopted maintenance plan
include, but are not limited to, the following:
    1. Lower Reid vapor pressure gasoline requirements; \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Prior to implementing lower Reid vapor pressure gasoline
requirements, the State of Indiana would have to be granted a waiver
to address preemption requirements under section 211(c)(4)(C) of the
Clean Air Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Broader geographic applicability of existing emission control
measures;
    3. Tightened Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT)
requirements on existing sources covered by EPA Control Technique
Guidelines (CTGs) issued in response to the 1990 Clean Air Act
amendments;
    4. Application of RACT to smaller existing sources;
    5. Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M);
    6. One or more Transportation Control Measures (TCM) sufficient to
achieve at least a 0.5 percent reduction in actual area-wide VOC
emissions;
    7. Alternative fuel and diesel retrofit programs for fleet vehicle
operations;
    8. Controls on consumer products consistent with those adopted
elsewhere in the United States;
    9. VOC and NOX emission offsets for new or modified
sources;
    10. Increased ratio of the emission offset required for new
sources; and,
    11. VOC and NOX emission controls on new minor sources
(with VOC or NOX emissions less than 100 tons per year).
    Consideration and selection of one or more of the contingency
measures will take place when a two-year average annual fourth-high
monitored daily peak 8-hour ozone concentration of 0.085 ppm or a
violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS \4\ is recorded at any monitor in
the Evansville area after the redesignation of the Evansville area to
attainment of the ozone NAAQS. The selected contingency measures will
be adopted and implemented within 18 months after the close of the
ozone season with the ozone data that trigger the need for the
implementation of the contingency measure(s).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ On October 20, 2005, the Indiana Department of Environmental
Management submitted a letter verifying the State's intent to
implement an ``Action Level Response'' and the triggering of a
requirement to select and implement contingency measures in the
event of a violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in several areas,
including Vanderburgh and Warrick Counties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The maintenance plan estimates emissions through 2015, ten years
after the year in which the State anticipated that EPA would complete
rulemaking on the State's ozone redesignation request, as required by
section 175A of the Clean Air Act. These VOC and NOX
emission estimates are for point, area, and mobile sources in the
Evansville area. The emissions estimates

demonstrate continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard through
2015. The latest available emissions information was used to project
the emissions. The mobile source emissions estimates were developed
using the MOBILE6 emission factor model. The State has committed to
update the maintenance plan and maintenance demonstration eight years
after the redesignation of the Evansville area to attainment of the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS to demonstrate maintenance of the standard for an
additional ten years, through 2025.

C. Approval and Finding of Adequacy of VOC and NOX Motor
Vehicle Emission Budgets for the Evansville Area

    EPA finds as adequate and approves the 2015 MVEBs of 4.20 tons per
day for VOC and 5.40 tons per day for NOX for the Evansville
area in the State-adopted ozone maintenance plan. These MVEBs have been
addressed through the appropriate public involvement and review process
without receiving adverse comment. These MVEBs meet the adequacy
criteria, 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), and are approvable as part of the 8-hour
ozone maintenance plan. The approved 2015 MVEBs will replace the MVEBs
currently used for transportation conformity analyses and
demonstrations, as detailed in our September 9, 2005 proposed rule,
upon the effective date of this rule. The newer MVEBs, which are being
approved as part of the 8-hour ozone maintenance plan, are consistent
with the goals of section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act because they set
a tighter cap on mobile source VOC and NOX emissions for
transportation conformity purposes, thereby limiting growth in mobile
source emissions allowed in the area's transportation plan.
    Subsequent to the effective date of this rule, the State of Indiana
and local planning agencies in the Evansville area will have to use the
2015 MVEBs in all transportation conformity analyses and
demonstrations.

D. Effective Date of These Actions

    These actions will become effective 30 days after today's
publication of this final rule in the Federal Register.

III. Why Are We Taking These Actions?

    EPA has determined that the Evansville area has attained the 8-hour
ozone standard. EPA has determined that the State of Indiana has
demonstrated that all other criteria for the redesignation of the
Evansville area from nonattainment to attainment of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS have been met. EPA is fully approving the ozone maintenance plan
for the Evansville area as meeting the requirements of sections 175A
and 107(d) of the Clean Air Act.
    In the September 9, 2005 proposed rule at 70 FR 53606, EPA
described the applicable criteria for redesignation to attainment.
Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act allows for
redesignation provided that: (1) The Administrator determines that the
area has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) the Administrator has fully
approved the applicable implementation plan for the area under section
110(k) of the Clean Air Act; (3) the Administrator determines that the
improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions resulting from the implementation of the
applicable state implementation plan, applicable Federal air pollution
control regulations, and other permanent and enforceable emission
reductions; (4) the Administrator has fully approved a maintenance plan
for the area as meeting the requirements of section 175A of the Clean
Air Act; and, (5) the state containing such area has met all
requirements applicable to the area under section 110 and part D of the
Clean Air Act.
    EPA has determined that the Evansville area has attained the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. EPA has approved all requirements in the Indiana SIP
applicable to the Evansville area under section 110(k) of the Clean Air
Act for purposes of redesignation. EPA has determined that the
improvement in ozone air quality in the Evansville area is due to
permanent and enforceable emission reductions resulting from the
implementation of the Indiana SIP, applicable Federal air pollution
control regulations, and other permanent and enforceable emission
reductions. EPA is fully approving an ozone maintenance plan for the
Evansville area meeting the requirements of section 175A of the Clean
Air Act. Finally, EPA concludes that the State of Indiana has met all
requirements applicable to the Evansville area under section 110 and
part D of the Clean Air Act for purposes of redesignation. Therefore,
EPA concludes that the State of Indiana and the Evansville area have
met all requirements applicable to the Evansville area for purposes of
redesignation to attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS under section 107
of the Clean Air Act.
    By finding that the ozone maintenance plan provides for maintenance
of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS through 2015, EPA is hereby finding adequate
and approving the 2015 VOC and NOX MVEBs contained in the
maintenance plan. The MVEB for VOC in the Evansville area is 4.20 tons
per day, and the MVEB for NOX in the Evansville area is 5.40
tons per day.
    The rationale for these findings and actions is stated in this
rulemaking and in more detail in the September 9, 2005 proposed rule,
found at 70 FR 53605.

IV. What Are the Effects of These Actions?

    Approval of the Indiana redesignation request changes the official
designation for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS found at 40 CFR part 81 for
Vanderburgh and Warrick Counties, Indiana from nonattainment to
attainment. It also incorporates into the Indiana SIP a plan for
maintaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS through 2015. The maintenance plan
includes contingency measures to remedy any future violation or
threatened violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Evansville area,
and includes VOC and NOX MVEBs for 2015 for the Evansville
area.

V. What Comments Did We Receive and What Are Our Responses?

    We received comments from eight individuals and organizations
responding to the September 9, 2005 proposed rule. Six of the
commenters submitted comments critical of various portions of the
proposed rule. One of the critical commenters included a petition
signed by 125 individuals asserting that the Evansville area has an air
quality problem requiring cleanup by the State and opposing a State
lawsuit against the EPA.\5\ One commenter, the Vanderburgh County Ozone
Officer, supported the proposed rule, and provided additional data and
analyses to support the proposed rule. Another commenter supported the
proposed rule. A summary of the comments and EPA's responses to them
are provided below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The nature of the State lawsuit against the EPA is not
defined in the signed petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment 1: Air Quality in 2005 Shows That the Evansville Area Continues
To Have an Ozone Problem

    A number of commenters have expressed the concern that the current
air quality in the Evansville area does not warrant redesignation to
attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard. These commenters focused
primarily on the following: (1) A number of ozone alerts \6\

were issued for southwestern Indiana during the summer of 2005; (2)
certain days in 2005 had high ozone concentrations but lacked ozone
alerts; (3) high levels of fine particulates (PM 2.5 \7\)
occurred on a number of days in 2005; and (4) the presence of haze and
gray skies in southern Indiana during 2005 indicated an ongoing air
quality problem. The commenters questioned whether air quality had
improved enough to justify redesignation and expressed a further
concern that a redesignation to attainment would result in the removal
of air quality monitoring equipment from the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Ozone alerts are issued based on monitored ozone
concentrations approaching or exceeding the standard and forecasted
meteorology favoring the formation of high ozone concentrations.
Ozone alerts are intended to alert the public to the potential for
high ozone concentrations. Ozone alerts are not necessarily
associated with ozone standard exceedances. Some ozone standard
exceedances simply fail to develop as forecasted. In addition, as
the result of the ozone action alerts, some companies and
individuals change operations or activities, lowering emissions, and
possibly averting ozone standard exceedances.
    \7\ Particulate matter with nominal aerodynamic diameters of 2.5
micrometers or less.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, one commenter, Joanne M. Alexandrovich, Ph.D.,
Vanderburgh County Department of Public Health's Ozone Officer,
expressed support for EPA's redesignation proposal. In so doing, she
provided 2005 ozone data for Posey, Vanderburgh, and Warrick Counties
showing that the Evansville area continues to meet the 8-hour ozone
standard. This includes data containing peak 8-hour ozone
concentrations for each monitoring site in the area for 2005 and three-
year ozone design values for each monitoring site for the period of
2003-2005. Dr. Alexandrovich also presented ozone concentration trends
data for each of the monitoring sites for the period of 1995-2005 to
demonstrate a robust downward trend in ozone design values at all
monitoring sites in the area, including at the Yankeetown site (the
site on the property of Alcoa, Incorporated (Alcoa), see Comment/
Response 2 below) and at other sites in Warrick County, where the
worst-case ozone monitors in the area are located.
    Dr. Alexandrovich notes that there were four exceedance days in the
vicinity of the Evansville area in 2005 (three in the Evansville area
and one in Posey County) and that the exceedances were recorded at
several sites, with only one site (Boonville High School in Warrick
County) recording exceedances on two days, and with no sites recording
exceedances on three or more days. This shows that the fourth-high
daily peak 8-hour ozone concentrations at all monitors in the area in
2005 were below 0.085 ppm (a monitored exceedance level cutoff).
Finally, Dr. Alexandrovich provided information regarding the dates of
ozone alerts and high ozone concentrations in 2005. These data show
that ozone alerts were issued on eight days in 2005, with only two of
the alert days actually having exceedances of the 8-hour ozone
standard. Two days without ozone alerts also had ozone standard
exceedances, one in the Evansville area and the other in Posey County.
Most ozone alert days had relatively high peak ozone concentrations,
but had peak ozone concentrations which failed to reach ozone standard-
exceedance levels.

Response 1

    In determining whether the 8-hour ozone standard is met, the 8-hour
ozone standard requires the use of the three most recent, consecutive
calendar years of monitoring data. 40 CFR 50.10, appendix I, parts 2.2
and 2.3. Thus, EPA has determined that the Evansville area has attained
the 8-hour ozone standard based on the data for the period of 2002-
2004. EPA has also reviewed quality assured data for 2005 provided by
the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM), and has
determined that they show that the Evansville area continued to attain
the 8-hour ozone standard through 2005. The quality assured peak ozone
concentrations for 2005 are summarized in Table 1 by monitoring site as
submitted by the State.

         Table 1.--Peak 2005 8-Hour Ozone Concentrations in the Evansville Area in Concentrations of PPM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     First      Second       Third      Fourth
                 Site                            County              High        High        High        High
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evansville--Mill Road.................  Vanderburgh.............       0.090       0.081       0.081       0.080
Scott School--Inglefield..............  Vanderburgh.............       0.058       0.057       0.057       0.056
Booneville High School................  Warrick.................       0.096       0.085       0.081       0.080
Dayville..............................  Warrick.................       0.083       0.078       0.077       0.077
Tecumseh High School--Lynnville.......  Warrick.................       0.082       0.078       0.077       0.076
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although a number of ozone alerts were issued for Southwestern
Indiana during the summer of 2005, quality assured data supplied by the
State show that no monitors recorded fourth-high ozone concentrations
above the 8-hour ozone standard. In addition, the 2003-2005 ozone
design values for all monitors in the Evansville area were below the
ozone standard violation cut-off level (below 0.085 ppm). Table 2
documents the 2003-2005 ozone design values by monitoring site in the
vicinity of Evansville.

     Table 2.--8-Hour Ozone Design Values in the Evansville Area in
                 Concentrations of PPM for 2003-2005 \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Ozone
           Monitoring Site                    County            Design
                                                                 Value
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evansville--Mill Road...............  Vanderburgh...........       0.077
Scott School--Inglefield............  Vanderburgh...........       0.063
Boonville High School...............  Warrick...............       0.076
Tecumseh High School--Lynnville.....  Warrick...............       0.073
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Ozone was also monitored at the Yankeetown-Alcoa and Dayville
  monitoring sites (both in Warrick County) during the period of 2003-
  2005. Ozone was monitored during 2003 and 2004 at the Yankeetown site,
  with an average fourth-high 8-hour daily maximum ozone concentration
  of 0.078 ppm. Ozone was monitored during 2005 at the Dayville site,
  with a fourth-high 8-hour daily maximum ozone concentration of 0.077
  ppm.

    These data show that no violations of the 8-hour ozone standard
were monitored in the Evansville area even when 2005 ozone data are
considered. This is true despite the commenters' observation that a
number of ozone

alerts were issued in 2005 for this area. In addition, as noted by one
of the commenters, ozone alerts were issued on eight days, but only two
of these alert days had monitored exceedances of the ozone standard. On
only two days lacking ozone alerts were ozone standard exceedances
monitored (only one of these was in the Evansville area, with the other
in Posey County, outside of the ozone nonattainment area \8\). Only one
monitoring site, Boonville High School, recorded multiple days of ozone
standard exceedances in 2005, but did not record a violation of the 8-
hour ozone standard during the period of 2003-2005. No monitors in the
Evansville area have recorded violations of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
based on the three most recent years of quality assured monitoring
data.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Even though 8-hour ozone standard exceedances have been
monitored in Posey County, this County is not in violation of the 8-
hour ozone standard.
    \9\ Occasional exceedances of the standard are allowed at any
monitor without a violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS occurring. As
long as the average annual fourth-high daily maximum 8-hour ozone
concentrations at all relevant ozone monitoring sites in an area
remain at or below 0.084 ppm for the most recent three-year period,
the area is not violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. With multiple
monitoring sites in an area, multiple exceedance days (exceedance of
the standard anywhere in the monitoring system) may occur during any
period without a violation of the ozone NAAQS actually occurring.
That was the case for the Evansville area for 2005 and for the
period of 2003-2005. Despite three exceedance days, the area
continued to attain the standard, the relevant criterion for our
determination of attainment and one of the criteria for
redesignation to attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A number of states and local area governments, including Indiana
and Evansville, have chosen to activate ozone alerts when ozone
concentrations are thought to be approaching the ozone standard and
meteorological conditions are forecasted to be favorable for the
formation of high ozone levels. Besides alerting the public to the
potential for high ozone concentrations and to the potential for the
need to change outdoor activities to avoid exposure to these high ozone
levels, the ozone alerts also inform owners of ozone precursor emitting
sources and the public that operations and activities should be altered
if possible to mitigate the ozone precursor emissions. This reduces the
potential for high ozone concentrations, and helps avoid violations of
the ozone NAAQS. Therefore, even though ozone action alerts were issued
on a number of days in 2005, this is not an indication of a violation
of the ozone standard, as demonstrated by the 2003-2005 ozone data for
the Evansville area. The quality assured monitoring data for 2002-2004
show that the Evansville area attained the 8-hour ozone standard, and
the quality assured 2003-2005 ozone data show that the area continues
to attain the ozone standard. EPA is correct in determining that the
Evansville area has attained the ozone standard, thus satisfying the
criterion for redesignation pursuant to section 107(d)(3)(E)(i) of the
Clean Air Act.
    The 8-hour ozone design values submitted by Dr. Alexandrovich also
show that ozone air quality has improved in the Evansville area. Ozone
design values for all sites for the period of 1995-2005 show a
significant downward trend, as noted by the commenter. The areawide
ozone design value for 2002-2004 was 0.083 ppm and the areawide ozone
design value for 2003-2005, based on the average of the fourth-highest
daily maximum 8-hour ozone concentrations for this period, was 0.077
ppm. The data show several aspects of special note. All sites in the
Evansville area exhibit essentially the same downward trend in ozone
design values. This shows that an ozone problem has not simply shifted
from one monitor site/area to another. In addition, the similar trends
in ozone design values show that the peak ozone concentrations are
reacting to common effects, including long-term downward trends in
regional ozone precursor emissions. An increase in the downward trend
of the ozone design values in the period of 2003-2005 at all monitoring
sites implies that the decrease in regional NOX emissions
resulting from EPA's NOX SIP call and other regional
emission reductions are having a beneficial impact on ozone levels on a
regional basis. See the response to Comment 10 below. As this commenter
notes and we agree, the trend toward decreasing ozone design values is
not expected to reverse in the near future as additional reductions in
regional emissions are expected to result through the implementation of
federally enforceable emission controls on vehicles, fuels, electric
utilities, and other major combustion sources.
    To demonstrate the downward trend in ozone design values, Table 3
summarizes ozone design values by monitoring site for the most recent
three three-year periods taken from the quality assured ozone data
supplied by the State.

  Table 3.--8-Hour Ozone Design Values for Periods of 2001-2003, 2002-
              2004, and 2003-2005 in Concentrations of PPM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Monitoring Site            2001-2003    2002-2004    2003-2005
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evansville--Mill Road............        0.083        0.082        0.077
Scott School--Inglefield.........        0.077        0.073        0.063
Alcoa--Yankeetown................        0.085        0.083           NA
Dayville.........................           NA           NA    \1\ 0.077
Boonville........................        0.081        0.080        0.076
Tecumseh High School.............        0.081        0.078       0.073
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Dayville site is only several miles from the discontinued Alcoa-
  Yankeetown site and is a replacement for the Alcoa monitor. The ozone
  design value given here is the fourth-high daily maximum 8-hour ozone
  concentration for 2005, the only year of monitoring data currently
  available for this monitoring site.

    With regard to the claims of high PM2.5 levels, it is
noted that this rulemaking addresses only the ozone designation of the
Evansville area. This rule does not address or affect the
PM2.5 designation for this area, and, thus, the
PM2.5 concentrations in this area have no bearing on EPA's
determinations regarding the attainment status of this area for the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS.
    The comment concerned with the ending of monitoring in the
Evansville area upon redesignation to attainment of the ozone NAAQS is
wrong for several reasons. First, and most importantly, the State of
Indiana has committed to continuing ozone monitoring in this area. See
70 FR 53613 (September 9, 2005). Second, the ozone maintenance plan
requires and depends on continued ozone monitoring during the lifetime
of the maintenance plan. Note that the ozone maintenance plan contains
action triggers directly tied to ozone monitoring. Under the approved

maintenance plan, ozone levels will be tracked and certain corrective
actions or further analyses will be triggered if monitored ozone
concentrations reach specified levels. To implement the ozone
maintenance plan, the State must continue ozone monitoring in the
Evansville area.
    With regard to haze and gray skies in southern Indiana, this issue
also is not relevant to a redesignation of the area for the ozone
standard, where the area has been shown to be attaining the 8-hour
ozone standard. A number of pollutant sources lead to the formation of
fine particulates, which can contribute to haze levels. Since the
Evansville area is a nonattainment area for fine particulates, the
State of Indiana is expected to assess the sources of the emissions
leading to these fine particulates and to develop strategies and
emission control regulations leading to attainment of the fine
particulates standards. In doing so, the State's actions should also
lead to reductions in haze levels and to cleaner skies. In addition,
regional emission reductions achieved through EPA's NOX SIP
call and Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) will further lower haze
levels and clear the skies of this area.
    With regard to the claim that the State and the City of Evansville
failed to issue an ozone alert when it would have been warranted, the
record of ozone alerts provided by Dr. Alexandrovich shows more
overpredictions of high ozone levels than underpredictions (more issued
ozone alerts on days with no ozone standard exceedances than failures
to issue ozone alerts on days with ozone standard exceedances). This
claim is also irrelevant to a redesignation action, which is based on
demonstrated attainment of the standard. There is no evidence to
support the claim that actions with respect to prior ozone alerts call
the maintenance plan into question. The maintenance plan contains
corrective actions that will occur if high ozone levels are monitored,
and does not conflict with or depend upon the State's plans for issuing
ozone alerts in the future. The fact that there were ozone alerts also
does not indicate that the area violated the ozone standard. The ozone
maintenance plan is designed to provide corrective actions if high
ozone levels or violation of the standard occur after redesignation of
the area to attainment of the NAAQS. The maintenance plan's contingency
measures are triggered by monitored ozone levels. The triggering of the
contingency measures in no way depends on the forecasting of high ozone
concentrations. Therefore, the issuing of ozone alerts is in no way
connected to the implementation of the ozone maintenance plan. The
maintenance plan relies on monitored ozone data and not on forecasted
concentrations. Regardless of the status of the ozone alert efforts,
the relevant issue for redesignation is that the Evansville area has
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS and has an approved plan for
maintaining the ozone standard.

Comment 2: The Critical Ozone Monitor at the Alcoa, Incorporated Site
Is No Longer Operating, Resulting in the Loss of Data That Would Have
Been a Violation of the Ozone Standard in 2005

    A commenter notes that Alcoa, Incorporated (Alcoa) had sought the
ozone redesignation while, at the same time, asking that the ozone
monitor on its property be terminated and/or relocated to another site.
This is a particular concern to the commenter since the Alcoa monitor
(which was shut down in October 2004) was the monitor that had recorded
the ozone standard violation on which the 2004 Evansville area ozone
nonattainment designation had been based. The commenter believes that,
had the monitor been left on the Alcoa property, it would likely have
continued to show a violation of the ozone NAAQS during the summer of
2005. This commenter also suggests that this redesignation request was
originated by Alcoa. Finally, the commenter believes that EPA and the
State are taking the approach of ``no data, no problem.''

Response 2

    The Alcoa (Yankeetown) monitor operated through the end of the 2004
ozone season. Data from the Alcoa monitor were considered both in
designating the Evansville area as nonattainment based on 2001-2003
data and in EPA's determination that the area attained the 8-hour ozone
standard based on 2002-2004 data. The State considered this monitor to
represent ambient air and requested Alcoa to quality assure the data
from this site, meeting State monitoring standards, so that these data
could be considered to be on par with the ozone data from other
monitors in the Evansville area and in the State. Alcoa disagreed with
the State, arguing that this monitor does not represent ambient air.
Alcoa objected to and challenged the designation of the Evansville area
as an 8-hour ozone nonattainment area based on the ozone monitoring at
the Alcoa site. Alcoa terminated the monitor at the end of the 2004
ozone season and the State located a new ozone monitor very close to
the Alcoa site, but off the premises of Alcoa. This new monitor, the
Dayville site, was operated in 2005.
    Prior to the establishment of the Dayville ozone monitoring site,
EPA was given the opportunity to review the characteristics of the
Dayville site relative to the characteristics of the Alcoa site. The
proximity of the two monitoring sites and the similarity of the
emissions near the monitoring sites (particularly the similarity and
spatial distribution of NOX emissions close to the
monitoring sites) led us to the conclusion that the two monitoring
sites were equivalent. We have seen no data to the contrary.
    The ozone trends data provided by Dr. Alexandrovich, as discussed
in Comment/Response 1, indicate that the Dayville monitoring data may
be generally considered in conjunction with the Alcoa data to assess
the long-term trend in the 8-hour ozone data for this area. The Alcoa/
Dayville ozone data show an ozone trend very similar to the ozone
trends for other monitors in the Evansville region. The 2005 data for
Dayville fit well with the prior data for the Alcoa site to produce an
ozone trend that matches those from other long-term sites in the area.
If the Dayville site was significantly different in local emission
characteristics and ozone response relative to the Alcoa site, one
might expect the short-term ozone trend (2004-2005) for this site pair
to be significantly different from the ozone trends for the long-term
sites. This is not the case. Based on this observation and considering
the close proximity and similarities of the Alcoa and Dayville
monitoring sites and the fact that the Dayville monitor recorded a
fourth-high daily maximum 8-hour ozone concentration of 0.077 ppm in
2005, we see no basis to assume or to speculate that the Alcoa site
would have recorded a violation of the 8-hour ozone standard based on
2003-2005 ozone data. Therefore, we disagree with the commenters on
this point.
    EPA can base its determination on whether the standard has been met
only on available ozone monitoring data and not on speculation. There
is no evidence that air quality at the Alcoa monitor would have
violated the 8-hour ozone standard in 2005. On the contrary, the data
show no violation of the ozone standard during the period of 2002-2004
for the Alcoa monitor, and no exceedances of the 8-hour ozone standard
at the replacement Dayville monitor in 2005. If anything, the available
data indicate that the Alcoa site would not have violated the 8-hour
ozone standard in 2005. At minimum, we cannot conclude that a violation
of

the 8-hour ozone standard would have been recorded at the Alcoa monitor
in 2005. The termination of the Alcoa monitor and its replacement by
the Dayville monitor do not affect the eligibility of the Evansville
area to qualify for redesignation. The available ozone data support
this redesignation, and the State has demonstrated that the area has
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    While EPA acknowledges that Alcoa chose to discontinue monitoring
on its property, it is the State of Indiana--and not Alcoa--that
developed, adopted, and submitted the ozone redesignation request. As
discussed above, EPA believes that the new, nearby ozone monitor at
Dayville provides ozone data equivalent those produced by the Alcoa-
Yankeetown monitor.
    The State is not exhibiting an attitude of ``no data, no problem,''
and has replaced the terminated Alcoa monitoring site with the Dayville
monitoring site. The State has supported the original 8-hour ozone
nonattainment designation for Warrick County (the county in which the
Alcoa site was located), and has supported maintaining an ozone monitor
in this area, recognizing that this area has a potential for relatively
high ozone concentrations. This is why the Dayville ozone monitoring
site was selected and implemented.
    EPA is not taking the approach of ``no data, no problem.'' First,
EPA (along with the State) considered the data from the Alcoa site in
both its original ozone designation of the area and in determining that
the area subsequently attained the 8-hour ozone standard. Second, EPA
has routinely required states to operate and maintain adequate ozone
monitoring networks to record ozone concentrations and to maintain such
networks after redesignation to assure maintenance of the standard.
EPA's guidance provides that an area's maintenance plan should contain
provisions for continued operation of air quality monitors to verify
continued attainment, and that the state should continue to operate an
appropriate air quality monitoring network in accordance with 40 CFR
part 58. Memorandum of John Calcagni, ``Procedures for Processing
Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' September 4, 1992. The
State has committed to continue operating an appropriate monitoring
network in the Evansville area. IDEM has committed to continue
operating and maintaining an approved ozone monitoring network in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58 through the 10-year maintenance period.

Comment 3: High Ozone Concentrations Have Been Monitored in Downwind
Perry County, and This Monitoring Site Should Be Considered in This
Ozone Redesignation Review as Part of the Evansville Area

    Several commenters expressed concerns about high ozone
concentrations monitored at the Leopold monitor in Perry County. The
commenters believe that during the first two years that the Leopold
monitor was operated, it showed exceedances of the 1-hour ozone
standard. Because the monitor was removed before it collected three
years of ozone data, the data for this monitoring site were not used to
designate Perry County as nonattainment for the 1-hour ozone standard.
The monitor has been replaced, although at a different site, and the
new monitor has recorded exceedances of the 8-hour ozone standard, but
has not collected three years of data showing a violation of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. The commenters believe that the Leopold monitoring site
should be considered to be part of the Evansville area, and that the
Leopold data should be considered in EPA's determination of the ozone
attainment status for the Evansville area. One of these commenters
wants a commitment from the EPA that the Leopold monitor will become
part of the Evansville ozone monitoring network, and that such action
will be considered as part of the ozone maintenance plan addressed in
EPA's final rule on Indiana's ozone redesignation request.
    Dr. Alexandrovich, the Vanderburgh County Ozone Officer, notes that
an ozone monitor was operated in Perry County from 1998 through 2001,
Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS) site 18-123-0008.
Although ozone levels were elevated at this site, no exceedances of the
1-hour ozone standard were monitored at this site through the 2001
ozone season. After the 2001 ozone season (April-September in Indiana),
this monitoring site was shut down. In 2004, a new monitoring site was
established at Leopold, AIRS site 18-123-0009. In 2005, this monitor
recorded exceedances of the 8-hour ozone standard on four days.\10\
Analyses of wind speeds and directions by hour (transport analyses) for
the high ozone days in 2005 show that the Evansville area was not a
likely source area for the ozone standard exceedances on three of the
four days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ No exceedance of the 8-hour ozone standard was monitored at
this site in 2004. The average fourth-high daily maximum 8-hour
ozone concentration for this site is 0.082 ppm for the period of
2004-2005 based on quality assured data supplied by the State.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Response 3

    The Leopold monitoring site should not be considered to be part of
the Evansville area. The boundary of the Evansville nonattainment area
was set in EPA's designation rulemaking of April 30, 2004, and EPA is
not re-visiting that rulemaking in this final rule. In its designation
rulemaking, EPA evaluated the boundary of the Evansville nonattainment
area in accordance with the statute, EPA guidance, and the criteria
that EPA applied nationally, and we considered all relevant factors.
See 69 FR 23858. Perry County, located to the east and separated from
the Evansville area by Spencer County, is designated as attainment for
the 8-hour ozone standard. See 40 CFR 81.315. There is no showing that
Perry County is monitoring a violation of the 8-hour ozone standard.
There is, thus, no possibility of showing that the Evansville area is
contributing to a violation of the ozone standard in Perry County.
    As noted by Dr. Alexandrovich, wind speed and direction analyses
for high ozone days in 2005 indicate that the Evansville area emissions
may be impacting the Leopold monitoring site on only one out of four
exceedance days during 2005 at this site. Areas south and east of the
Leopold monitor (and not west in the direction of the Evansville area)
appear to be the primary emission source areas that may be affecting
Perry County on three of the four exceedance days. These data show that
the Evansville area cannot be held responsible for the majority of the
days on which there are high levels of ozone at the Leopold monitoring
site. It appears that a number of other ozone precursor source areas in
Indiana, Kentucky, and other upwind areas may be affecting ozone
concentrations in Perry County.
    For all of these reasons, we disagree with the commenters'
assertions that Perry County should be part of the Evansville area and
that the Leopold monitoring data should change EPA's decisions on the
attainment and maintenance status of the Evansville area.
    The 1-hour ozone concentrations monitored in Perry County have no
bearing on our decision regarding the attainment status of the
Evansville area for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. We are not considering 1-
hour ozone concentrations in any decision regarding 8-hour ozone
redesignations. In addition, as of June 15, 2005, the 1-

hour ozone NAAQS was revoked and no longer exists.
    There is no showing that Perry County and the other Counties cited
by the commenters are monitoring violations of the 8-hour ozone
standard. Therefore, neither EPA nor the State is failing to disclose a
current violation of the standard in this area. Monitored air quality
data for Perry County are available to the public through AIRS or
through the State's data system and air quality data summaries. In
addition, it should be noted that the adequacy of monitoring in areas
which are outside of the Evansville area, and which have not been shown
to affect the determination of attainment in the Evansville area, is
not relevant to this rulemaking.

Comment 4: There Was Unusually Cool Meteorology in 2003 and 2004 That
Led to Abnormally Low Peak Ozone Concentrations

    Several commenters have asserted that the Evansville area
experienced unusually cool weather in 2003 and 2004, and that EPA
should consequently reject the State's redesignation request. A
commenter further states that redesignation guidance issued by the EPA
in September 1992 is clear in requiring that a redesignation to
attainment must not be a result of ``unusual meteorology.'' On the
other hand, 2002 data show clear exceedances of the 8-hour ozone
standard. This commenter also believes that the summer of 2005 clearly
shows that, under the right conditions, the Evansville Metropolitan
Statistical Area (MSA) will continue to exceed the 8-hour ozone
standard.
    Another commenter, Dr. Alexandrovich, notes that meteorological
statistics indicate that over the last 10 years, with a few exceptions,
the weather in the Evansville area was within normal ranges. The
commenter presents data on the departure of daily average temperatures
from normal daily temperature averages, the departure of monthly
average temperatures from normal monthly average temperatures, and the
departure of monthly precipitation levels from normal monthly
precipitation levels for the April through September periods of 1995
through 2005 to support conclusions regarding whether 2003 and 2004
were atypical years unusually favorable to lower peak ozone
concentrations. The commenter also documents the ozone standard
exceedance days with respect to departures of daily average
temperatures from normal daily average temperatures. The data, in the
accumulative, indicate that: (1) The weather in 2003 and 2004 was not
atypically colder or drier/wetter than the weather during the ozone
seasons in other years during the period of 1995-2005; (2) ozone
standard exceedance days were not limited to days with atypically high
temperatures; and (3) ozone exceedance trends (in number of exceedance
days per year) were not associated with year-to-year trends in peak
daily temperatures or precipitation. In other words, meteorological
trends or deviations from normal meteorological conditions cannot
explain the observed trends in peak ozone concentrations. This leaves
one to conclude that the downward trend in peak ozone concentrations in
the Evansville area is due to emission decreases in this area or in the
surrounding region.

Response 4

    As part of the State's ozone redesignation request, the State
documented a temperature analysis conducted to show that unusually
favorable meteorology was not responsible for the observed air quality
improvement. In this analysis, the State considered temperatures during
the ozone-conducive months of May through September for the period of
1971-2000 versus the same months during the attainment period, 2002-
2004. Temperature data were reviewed for a number of weather stations,
including Indiana weather stations at: Bloomfield; Boonville; Dubois;
Freelandville; Huntingburg; Mount Vernon; Shoals; Saint Meinrad; and
Washington, along with temperature data supplied by the Evansville
National Weather Service office. The temperature data were used to
calculate the monthly average number of 90 degree days \11\ during the
period of 1995-1999. Temperature data were also used to determine the
monthly normal maximum temperatures for the summer months for the
period of 1971-2004. Monthly maximum temperatures were compared by
month for various years for 1996 through 2004. Based on these analyses,
it was concluded that the temperatures during the 2002 summer months of
May, June, July, August, and September, were 1 to 2 percent higher than
the long-term monthly norms, while the monthly maximum temperatures
during the 1996, 1997, 2000, 2001, 2003, and 2004 summer months were 1
to 5 percent lower than the long-term averages. On average, the monthly
maximum temperatures in the summer months of 2003 and 2004 were 3
percent and 2 percent below the long-term averages, respectively,
whereas, on average, the monthly maximum temperatures in 2002 were 2
percent higher than the long-term averages. It should be noted that
monthly maximum temperature ranges (when compared to the long-term
monthly average maximum temperatures) were essentially identical
between the 2001-2003 period used to designate the Evansville area as
nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the 2002-2004 attainment
period. This is one indicator that temperature differences between
various years were not the key factor in the observed air quality
improvement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Days with peak temperatures equal to or greater than 90
degrees Fahrenheit at any of the meteorological monitoring sites
considered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The State also compared the number of 90 degree days during the
summer months for each year during the period of 1995-2004 to the
``normal'' number of such days (the average for all years in this
period) for the Evansville Regional Airport. The State compared these
data to the number of 8-hour ozone standard exceedance days for each
year. These data point to 2002 as being an abnormally warm summer,
having a higher than average number of ozone standard exceedance days,
whereas 2003 and 2004 were below average in warm summer days, but with
numbers of ozone standard exceedance days more indicative of the
averages during the period of 2000-2004, excluding 2002. The State
concludes from these data that a greater number of ozone exceedance
days per year correlates with a greater number of 90 degree days per
year. This analysis supports a connection between meteorology and the
number of ozone standard exceedance days per year, but does not support
or address the case that 2003 and 2004 were atypically cool years. The
State does conclude that, based on long-term trends, the annual number
of 8-hour ozone standard exceedance days shows a greater downward trend
than the annual number of 90 degree days. That is, the local summer
climate is cooling, but the ozone air quality is improving at a faster
rate, implying that emission decreases are responsible for the air
quality improvement rather than the long-term change in meteorology.
    To further consider this issue, we refer to the temperature and
precipitation analyses documented by Dr. Alexandrovich (other
commenters made assertions without providing supporting data). This
commenter analyzed the ozone season departure of daily average
temperatures from normal and the long-term daily average temperatures
for each year during the

period of 1996-2005. This analysis also indicated the departures of
daily average temperatures on 8-hour ozone standard exceedance days
during this period. Considering temperature variations throughout the
ozone seasons, the commenter concluded that 2003, 2004, and 2005 were
not atypically colder during the ozone season than other years in the
1996-2005 period. No years showed departures of daily average
temperatures outside of the typical meteorological variability range.
Additionally, the commenter concluded that ozone standard exceedances
occurred on days with both above and below average daily peak
temperatures, but do preferentially occur over periods of increasing
temperatures, reflecting the influence of warming air masses on
increasing ozone levels.
    Dr. Alexandrovich also analyzed the departures of average monthly
temperatures and precipitation levels from normal levels during the
ozone seasons for the period of 1995-2005 along with the annual number
of 8-hour ozone standard exceedance days for this period. This analysis
failed to show any connection between monthly average temperatures and
monthly precipitation and the annual number of ozone standard
exceedance days. This commenter concludes that the weather over the
last 10 years in the Evansville area was within normal ranges and no
``unusually favorable meteorology'' influenced the downward trend in
peak ozone levels (towards cleaner air).
    Given the data supplied by the State and Dr. Alexandrovich and the
lack of data countering their conclusions, we see no support for the
commenter's claim that the improvement in ozone air quality was due to
unusually favorable meteorology. See the John Calcagni memorandum at 4.
We agree that meteorology does influence peak ozone concentrations, but
we see greater evidence in this case that emission reductions, both
local and, more significantly, regional, were responsible for the
reduction in peak ozone concentrations leading to attainment of the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. See our response to Comment 10 below. Therefore, we
disagree with the commenters that unusually favorable meteorology led
to attainment of the ozone NAAQS.

Comment 5: The Maintenance Plan Failed To Address Surrounding Counties,
and Emission Increases in These Surrounding Areas and in the Evansville
Area Will Threaten Maintenance of the Ozone Standard

    A commenter questions why the maintenance plan did not include the
surrounding counties in the Evansville MSA and why the surrounding
counties were not included in the original ozone nonattainment area.
    A commenter asserts that, if EPA allows this redesignation, this
will allow increases in pollution levels instead of reducing emissions
as required by the Clean Air Act.
    A commenter notes that there is nothing in the State's maintenance
plan that deals with counties besides Warrick and Vanderburgh Counties.
The commenter contends that additional counties should have been
included in the original Evansville nonattainment area as required by
EPA's designation guidance. The commenter claims that EPA's guidance
required all of the counties in the MSA to be treated equally and to be
included in the nonattainment area, and that EPA failed to follow its
own guidance, excluding counties in Indiana and Kentucky from the
nonattainment area that are part of the Evansville MSA. As a result of
this, the commenter argues that nothing in the maintenance plan will
apply to the ``other'' counties, whose emissions impact the ozone
levels in the entire region.
    A commenter asserts that the failure to include the other counties
will bode poorly for the health of citizens in this region since new
coal-fired power plants are proposed for Henderson County, Kentucky,
just a few miles from the current ozone nonattainment area. The
commenter claims that, had EPA followed its own guidance in
establishing the original nonattainment area, the prospect of new coal-
fired power plants for the region would have been different, if not
impossible.
    Several commenters demand that all counties in the Evansville MSA
comply with the Indiana maintenance plan. The commenters believe that
to let these counties ``off the hook'' when they have emission sources
that are larger than anything in Vanderburgh County is outside of the
spirit, legal guidance, and rules of the Clean Air Act. A commenter
contends that Gibson and Posey Counties in Indiana and Henderson County
in Kentucky should also be included in the maintenance plan for the
Evansville area.
    A commenter questions whether EPA and IDEM considered the impact of
several new power plants proposed for the region, including a ``giant''
1500 megawatt old technology plant just upwind of the ozone
nonattainment area in Kentucky that has already received an operating
permit from the Kentucky Division of Air Quality. This commenter
additionally notes that proposals for at least three additional large
power plants are pending, one just northwest of the ozone nonattainment
area, one to the north of the nonattainment area, and one just south of
the nonattainment area in Henderson County, Kentucky. The commenter
claims that these power plants, together with those already permitted,
will likely make it impossible to maintain the attainment of the 8-hour
ozone standard in the future.
    A commenter contends that there are at least 15 coal-fired power
plants in the Evansville region, and that these plants emit sulfur
dioxide, nitrogen oxide, fine and course particulates, mercury, and
hydrochloric acid. The commenter claims that it stands to reason,
especially since the Evansville area is not in attainment according to
EPA standards, that the Evansville area needs to have a monitor in
place to ensure that the area's air quality is at safe levels needed
for healthy, productive lives.
    Another commenter expressed the hope that, if new coal-fired power
plants are brought on line in the future, the older coal-fired plants
will be phased out and clean coal technologies will be used.
    One of the commenters raising concerns about the growth of new
power plants in the area attached a copy of a ``Clean Air Petition to
Governor Daniels.'' This document was signed by a number of citizens of
Newburgh, Indiana, and expresses opposition to ``the state's lawsuit
against the E.P.A.'' The nature of the State lawsuit against EPA is not
specified in the petition, nor in the commenter's cover letter.
    Finally, a commenter states that, aside from the potential for new
power plants, an attainment designation would tell companies that they
have done enough toward reducing their emissions. The commenter argues
that companies will do no more than is necessary, and that power plants
will not make any improvements to decrease emissions of carcinogens.
The commenter asserts that people are beginning to see the problem in
the Evansville area, that government agencies are failing the people.

Response 5

    Regarding the issue of whether other counties should have been
included in the Evansville ozone nonattainment area, as indicated above
in the response to Comment 3, the appropriateness of

the designation of the area, which was promulgated on April 30, 2004,
is not the subject of this rulemaking. EPA evaluated the designation of
the Evansville area in accordance with the statute, EPA guidance, and
criteria that EPA applied in designations nationally. EPA considered
all appropriate factors and concluded that Vanderburgh and Warrrick
Counties were the appropriate area for the nonattainment area. See 69
FR 23858.
    Regarding the issue of whether additional counties should be
included in the maintenance plan, section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv) of the Clean
Air Act provides that, in approving a redesignation request, the
Administrator must have a ``fully approved a maintenance plan for the
area'' as meeting the requirements of section 175A. Thus, EPA need only
approve a plan adequate to cover the nonattainment area that is being
redesignated. Nevertheless, EPA and the State also reviewed the
emission levels in other southwestern Indiana counties and determined
that further declines in emissions are projected there as well. In our
proposed rulemaking, we considered the attainment year and projected
year NOX emissions for five other counties in southwestern
Indiana, and determined that emissions totals in these counties were
projected to decrease during the Evansville area's ozone maintenance
period (through 2015). See 70 FR 53612 (September 9, 2005). In
addition, we note that ozone modeling conducted by the EPA and by the
Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO) to support the Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR) for 2010 and 2015 shows that regional
NOX emission reductions at electric generating units (power
plants) in the eastern states will result in peak ozone reductions
throughout the eastern states, and most importantly for the purposes of
this rulemaking, throughout southwestern Indiana. CAIR will result in
NOX emission reductions throughout southwestern Indiana that
will contribute to the maintenance of the ozone standard in the
Evansville area. See also response to Comment 10.
    Other counties outside the maintenance area are not ``being let off
the hook,'' as one commenter alleges, since they remain subject to the
Clean Air Act requirements applicable to them and must demonstrate
attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard. The fact that the counties are
not included in the Evansville area ozone maintenance plan does not
exempt these counties from the applicable requirements of the Clean Air
Act with respect to attainment and maintenance of the 8-hour ozone
standard. Thus, there is no requirement or need to extend the
maintenance plan beyond the Evansville area.
    Redesignation of the Evansville area is not expected to result in
overall emissions increases. Redesignation does not relax any pollution
control measures on existing sources in place at the time of the
redesignation. Indiana has committed to maintaining all existing
emission control measures that affect the Evansville area after
redesignation. If the area were not redesignated, the only difference
would be that the area would be subject to New Source Review (NSR)
requirements under part D of title I for nonattainment areas, rather
than the NSR requirements under part C of title I for attainment areas.
This difference, however, does not mean that redesignation itself would
result in increased emissions from the area. Note that the State
demonstrated that overall emissions will decrease in the ten years
following redesignation, even with part C NSR requirements. The
maintenance plan also provides for contingency measures to be activated
in the event that ozone levels increase to exceedance levels, so that,
if increased emissions cause ozone air quality problems, implementation
of new emission controls would be required.
    With regard to power plants in the areas surrounding the Evansville
area, several points are relevant to this set of comments. First, the
existence of a number of power plants in the area has not prevented the
Evansville area from achieving attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard.
Despite the emissions from these power plants, the air quality in the
Evansville area has improved to the point of attaining the 8-hour ozone
standard. In fact, the reduction of regional NOX emissions
at these power plants, as a result of EPA's NOX SIP call, is
believed to be a significant contributor to the air quality improvement
in the Evansville area. Second, the redesignation of the Evansville
area to attainment will have no bearing on the implementation of the
state NOX emission control rules resulting from the
NOX SIP call and on the State's adoption and implementation
of emission control rules resulting from CAIR. NOX emissions
at the power plants will continue to be capped on statewide bases and
states will have to account for new power plant emissions within these
statewide emission caps. Finally, the designation of the Evansville
area has little or no bearing on the permitting of new power plant
emissions, particularly those in areas outside of Indiana. The impact
of any new power plant on the area should be considered in the
permitting process. Section 165(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act provides
that there must be an air quality analysis to demonstrate that a
proposed project will not cause or contribute to a violation of a
NAAQS. Indiana has demonstrated that emissions inside of the Evansville
area will remain at or below the attainment year levels through 2015,
which indicates that the 8-hour ozone standard will be maintained
during this period. As for the impact of emissions outside of the
Evansville area, the commenters provided no analysis indicating that
any such emissions would be likely to cause or contribute to violations
of the ozone NAAQS in the future. In fact, NOX emissions
projections for other counties within southwestern Indiana show that
they are expected to decrease. See 70 FR 53612 (September 9, 2005).
Furthermore, EPA notes that NOX emissions from proposed
power plants will be subject to the regional NOX emission
reduction requirements of the NOX SIP call and, in the
future, CAIR. See 70 FR 25162 (May 12, 2005). Since Kentucky and
Indiana are subject to these programs, sources subject to these
programs and to the state rules that result from these programs will
remain subject to NOX emissions budgets for the States that
will not increase as a result of a possible new power plant.
Consequently, new power plants will have to obtain NOX
emission allowances from other existing sources subject to the
NOX SIP call and/or CAIR, maintaining statewide
NOX emissions from power plants at or below the statewide
NOX emission budgets. Therefore, permitting of new power
plants subject to these rules is not expected to result in increases in
regional NOX emissions. In addition, this rulemaking
concerns only the 8-hour ozone standard and does not address emissions
for other pollutants. Sources remain subject to the statutory and
regulatory requirements governing those pollutants.
    In addition, as noted by a commenter, if new power plants are built
in the future, they may utilize lower-emitting technologies as they
replace older, less-controlled power plants. To the extent this occurs,
regional emissions could be further reduced and not necessarily
increased.
    Finally, with regard to the petition to Governor Daniels, we
believe that the referenced lawsuit against EPA is Catawba County,
North Carolina v. EPA, Case No. 05-1064, and consolidated cases (D.C.
Cir.). In that action, a number of parties (including State of Indiana)
have challenged EPA's January and April 2005 designation of certain
areas as nonattainment for the PM2.5

NAAQS. As that matter deals solely with EPA's PM2.5
designations, it is not relevant to the subject matter of this
rulemaking, which concerns a redesignation for the 8-hour ozone
standard.

Comment 6: Serious Health Problems Occur at Ozone Concentrations Below
80 Parts Per Billion, and the Evansville Area Should Not Redesignate To
Attainment Until the Area Meets a Tighter Ozone Standard

    Several commenters expressed their belief that serious health
problems from ozone exposure occur at levels below the 0.08 ppm
standard established by the EPA, noting that the State of California
has adopted a 70 parts per billion (ppb) (0.07 ppm) ozone standard. One
commenter added that EPA should adopt this tighter ozone standard, and
should not redesignate the Evansville area to attainment until it has
attained this more stringent standard. Another commenter stated his
belief that EPA is considering the promulgation of a tighter ozone
standard, and that it made no sense to redesignate the Evansville area
to attainment only to shortly thereafter designate the Evansville area
as nonattainment for the tighter ozone standard.

Response 6

    The issue of whether EPA should adopt a tighter ozone standard is
not part of this rulemaking. In this rulemaking, EPA is addressing the
attainment status of the Evansville area for the 0.08 ppm ozone
standard currently in effect. Under the Clean Air Act, EPA can
determine the attainment status of areas based only on currently
adopted air quality standards. The Clean Air Act does not provide for
nonattainment designations based on air quality standards that have not
been promulgated. See section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act.
    If, after a future review of the available health data, the EPA
revises the ozone standard, the Evansville area and other areas would
be judged against that new standard. Redesignating the Evansville area
to attainment of the current standard now would not prevent designating
the Evansville area as a nonattainment area under the new standard if
the available ozone monitoring data warrant such a designation. Until
then, EPA can only judge the Evansville area under the current ozone
standard.

Comment 7: Political and Industrial Pressures Have Preempted Both
Public and Environmental Health Concerns, and This Redesignation Will
Allow More Emissions and Worse Air Quality

    A number of commenters asserted that the redesignation process was
politically motivated, and that the State and EPA were more concerned
about the area's economic status than about public health. Referring in
part to comments made by local officials during a 2003 public hearing,
they argued that political and industrial pressures have preempted
public health and environmental concerns with little or no input from
the affected public. One commenter questioned EPA's delegation of
programs to Indiana. Another commenter asserted that EPA's action was
inconsistent with EPA's mission to protect human health and the
environment.

Response 7

    The comments as to the motivation of State and Federal regulators
are irrelevant to the issue of whether the Evansville area qualifies
for redesignation under the Clean Air Act. The pertinent issue is
whether the redesignation meets the applicable requirements and
procedures. As discussed in greater detail in response to Comment 9,
the State has complied with all of the substantive and procedural
requirements established by Congress for redesignation pursuant to
section 107(d)(3) of the Clean Air Act. This includes a determination
that the area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, as evidenced by
quality-assured monitoring data which show no NAAQS violations. It also
includes a 10-year maintenance plan to ensure that the area continues
to attain the NAAQS.
    The State also complied with all applicable notice and hearing
requirements prior to submitting the redesignation request and ozone
maintenance plan to the EPA. Similarly, EPA followed the applicable
procedures when it proposed action on September 9, 2005, and provided
for the submission of written comments. Thus, the State and EPA have
followed all statutory procedures for notice and public participation.
    EPA has evaluated the State's submission in light of the applicable
statutory criteria. After notice and consideration of the State's
submission, the data, and all comments, EPA has determined that the
area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard and that it meets the other
criteria for redesignation to attainment set forth in the Clean Air
Act. Contrary to a commenter's allegation, EPA is not working to ``mask
the true state of nonattainment'' in the area, and is not
``conspiring'' to ``doctor'' or ``deny'' the scientific data on record.
EPA has carried out its obligation to review the redesignation request
in conformance with the statute and with all prescribed procedures.
Contrary to a commenter's contention, EPA, in redesignating the area,
is not giving ``deference to big polluters.'' Nor has EPA ignored or
concealed monitored violations in the Evansville area. When the
Evansville area monitored a violation of the 8-hour ozone standard, EPA
took action to designate the area as nonattainment, as evidenced by the
nonattainment designation promulgated for the area on April 30, 2004.
As stated in the response to Comment 5, the redesignation action is not
expected to cause overall emissions increases in the area.
    Statements made during a state hearing in 2003 regarding the
prospective designation of the area are irrelevant as to whether the
area qualifies for redesignation to attainment based on subsequent air
quality data, plan submissions, and rulemaking proceedings. In
redesignating the area, EPA is acting in good faith and in accordance
with the statute and applicable regulations and with all prescribed
procedures, and in keeping with its obligations to administer the law
in the public interest
    To the extent that the comments reflect concern about new
industrial growth in the area, EPA notes that statutory and regulatory
requirements remain in place to ensure that such growth occurs in a
manner consistent with today's action. In addition to the State's
maintenance plan, this includes the State and Federal requirements for
the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) at 326 IAC 2-2 and 40
CFR part 52.21, respectively. Under PSD, major new sources cannot be
constructed unless the source owners/operators install the Best
Available Control Technology (BACT), can demonstrate that the
applicable air quality increments will be protected, and meet
additional requirements to ensure that the area remains in attainment.

Comment 8: The EPA has Misinterpreted the Ozone Standard in Concluding
That an Ozone Design Value of 83 Parts Per Billion Is At or Below the
Ozone Standard

    Several commenters have noted that the 2002-2004 ozone design value
at the Yankeetown monitor (Alcoa monitor in Warrick County) was 83 ppb.
The commenters argue that this ozone

design value is above the 80 ppb ozone standard, and, therefore, should
be considered to be a violation of the ozone standard. They also assert
that the 83 ppb ozone design value is closer to the 85 ppb ozone
exceedance cutoff level than to the 80 ppb standard, and that EPA
should err on the side of caution to protect public health and the
environment and not redesignate the Evansville area to attainment of
the ozone NAAQS with this monitored ozone design value. A commenter
believes that the rounding protocol (rounding of monitored ozone
concentrations to the digital accuracy reflected in the ozone standard
itself) should not be allowed in the redesignation of nonattainment
areas, and that following it indicates that EPA's decision is more
based on politics than on science or common sense.

Response 8

    In assessing an area's ozone air quality data in the review of an
ozone redesignation request, EPA must determine whether the area has
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the definition of the NAAQS
contained in 40 CFR 50.10, as interpreted in appendix I. The definition
of the standard and its interpretation in appendix I establish specific
criteria for the review of air quality data.
    The definition of the ozone standard (primary and secondary \12\)
in 40 CFR 50.10 specifies that the level of the standard is 0.08 ppm,
daily maximum 8-hour average. Note that the ozone standard level is not
specified in units of ppb. We sometimes refer to the standard in units
of ppb only for purposes of readability, avoiding the use of fractional
numbers; but this is not a precise reference to the standard.
Therefore, the commenters err in asserting that the 8-hour ozone
standard level is 80 ppb.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Primary standards are set to protect human health, and
secondary standards are set to protect the environment. In the case
of ozone, the primary and secondary standards are identical.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The definition of the ozone standard in 40 CFR part 50.10 states
that ``the 8-hour primary and secondary ozone standards are met at an
ambient air quality monitoring site when the average of the annual
fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration is less
than or equal to 0.08 ppm, as determined in accordance with appendix I
to this part.'' Ozone data from air quality monitors are reported with
decimal levels of three digits, although the 8-hour standard itself
contains just two decimal digits. 40 CFR part 50, appendix I, parts
2.1, 2.1.2, and 2.2. Appendix I, part 2.1.1 requires that hourly
average ozone concentrations shall be reported in parts per million to
the third decimal place. EPA applies an established rounding
convention, set forth in regulations, to determine whether a monitoring
result expressed to the third decimal place complies with the two-
decimal-place standard. Specifically, section 2.3 of 40 CFR part 50,
appendix I, ``Comparisons with the Primary and Secondary Standards''
states:

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

The examples provided in appendix I also make it clear that the
standard is met when the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest
daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration is less than or equal
to 0.084 ppm (84 ppb). EPA has consistently used this rounding
convention since promulgating the standard, and properly applied the
convention here to assess compliance with the standard. Thus, an ozone
design value of 83 ppb (0.083 ppm) is not a violation of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. Moreover, the Evansville area ozone design value for the
most recent three years, through the end of the 2005 ozone season,
based on the average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour
ozone concentrations over three years, is 0.077 ppm. Thus, the most
recent ozone data show an ozone design value for the area substantially
lower than 0.085 ppm, the level set as the smallest ozone concentration
average that exceeds the 8-hour ozone standard.
    Previously, under the 1-hour ozone standard, EPA followed a
rounding convention similar to that in appendix I. EPA's application of
the rounding convention under the 1-hour standard to determinations of
attainment has been upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Our
Children's Earth Foundation v. EPA, No. 04-73032, Memorandum Opinion at
2 (June 28, 2005).
    Based on the above, we conclude that we have not erred in
determining that the Evansville area has attained the 8-hour ozone
standard. EPA based its determination of attainment in this case
squarely on the interpretation of the ozone NAAQS set forth in its
regulations. We disagree with the commenters on this point.

Comment 9: EPA Should Conduct a Public Hearing Before EPA Finalizes the
Ozone Redesignation of the Evansville Area

    While several commenters acknowledge that public hearings have been
held by the State regarding the requested ozone redesignation and the
ozone maintenance plan, they assert that they did not realize until the
summer of 2005 how serious the pollution problem is in southern
Indiana. As a result, the commenters request that EPA conduct a public
hearing prior to acting on the State's ozone redesignation request. One
commenter asserted that the Evansville area is well above the national
average in many major diseases, thus further justifying the need for a
public hearing.
    Several other commenters have registered complaints regarding EPA's
denial of requests for a public hearing on the proposed redesignation
of the Evansville area to attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. One of
these commenters acknowledges that the State held a public hearing on
the redesignation request in April 2005, but this commenter believes
that the State was anything but objective in preparing the
redesignation request and in conducting this public hearing, giving
deference to large polluters in the area. A commenter also questioned
the State of Indiana's objectivity on the basis of IDEM's testimony
supporting a new power plant over the objections of local residents.
    One commenter stated that EPA should address the issue of
environmental justice, noting that the EPA had recently proposed a
broader definition of environmental justice to encompass criteria
beyond those related to race and minority populations.

Response 9

    The EPA believes that interested parties were given ample
opportunities to comment on Indiana's ozone redesignation request and
associated SIP revision request. Section 553(c) of the Administrative
Procedure Act (APA), which governs informal rulemaking actions, such as
redesignation rulemakings, does not require EPA to provide for a
hearing. Section 553(c) states that:

``The agency shall give interested persons an opportunity to
participate in the rulemaking

through submission of written data, views, or arguments with or
without opportunity for oral presentation.''

EPA does not, as a matter of standard practice, conduct hearings on
redesignation requests. EPA believes that the opportunity to provide
written comments is sufficient, and stated in its response to requests
for a hearing that it believed that to be the case with respect to
Evansville. In denying the requests for a hearing, EPA explained that
it had determined that the opportunity to submit written comments on
its proposed rulemaking action constituted an adequate means of
providing input from the public, and extended the public comment
period. See 70 FR 58167 (October 5, 2005). Indeed several sets of
written comments were received and EPA is addressing those comments in
this final rule. There is no contention that the commenters lacked
adequate time to prepare and submit written comments. EPA has provided
an opportunity for interested parties to present data, views, and
arguments through written comments. No showing was made that the
opportunity to provide written comments precluded meaningful public
participation.
    The State has provided evidence that it notified the public of its
intent to hold a public hearing on the redesignation request. The State
held a public hearing and received feedback on its plans and draft
submittals. EPA finds that the State met the public participation
requirements of the Clean Air Act. Section 110(a). There was no change
in circumstances that would have required the State to hold additional
hearings, and commenters did not indicate that they requested
additional hearings at the state level. The State submissions were
adequate to support the redesignation request and the requested SIP
revision. Claims that the State lacked objectivity are irrelevant to
EPA's finding that the quality-assured monitoring data and other
documentation submitted by the State are sufficient to support the
request for redesignation of the area to attainment.
    The incidence of cancer and other diseases noted by a commenter is
not relevant to the issue of whether the area should be redesignated to
attainment based on recent air quality in the Evansville area that
meets the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and the fulfillment of other statutory
criteria for redesignation as described elsewhere in this notice.
    With regard to the comment on environmental justice, based on its
commitment to environmental justice, EPA seeks to ensure that its
actions do not have disproportionately high and adverse environmental
effects on communities, including minority and low-income communities.
As explained elsewhere in this document (see the response to Comment
5), today's action is designed to prevent violations of the health-
based national ambient air quality standard. It does not result in the
relaxation of control measures on existing sources and therefore will
not cause emissions increases from those sources. Overall, as discussed
in response to Comment 5, emissions in the area are projected to
decline following the redesignation. Thus, today's action will not have
disproportionately high and adverse effects on any communities in the
area, including minority or low-income communities.

Comment 10: The State Has Not Adopted and Implemented Federally
Enforceable Emission Controls as Required by the Clean Air Act as a
Condition for Redesignation to Attainment

    A commenter notes that the Clean Air Act requires that areas
seeking redesignation to attainment must undertake actions that are
``federally enforceable'' to improve air quality. The commenter claims
that the State has not done so. The commenter argues that the State is,
instead, relying entirely on the Federal NOX SIP call, which
was promulgated in 2001--three years before EPA made the decision to
make the Evansville area nonattainment for the ozone NAAQS. The
commenter also claims that there has been no action by any level of
government to reduce ozone forming conditions since the Evansville area
was designated nonattainment.
    Another commenter contends that, while there were some reductions
in ozone precursor emissions in the immediate nonattainment area as a
result of EPA's NOX SIP call, it is unclear, at this time,
whether these emission reductions will have a positive or negative
impact on the local air quality as the result of ``NOX
scavenging'' of ozone. The commenter claims that this phenomenon
appears to be the case in the summer of 2005, when the ozone monitor in
Inglefield recorded low levels of ozone compared to the other monitors
in the area.
    Dr. Alexandrovich states that the ozone trends at monitors in the
Evansville area, particularly in the most recent years, are explained
by regional emission reductions achieved through the Federal Motor
Vehicle Emissions Control Program, acid rain control program, and
NOX SIP call supplemented by local emissions reductions in
Vanderburgh and Warrick Counties. Further emissions reductions will be
achieved through additional Federal emission reductions from vehicles,
fuels, and electric utilities. This commenter goes on to state that
ozone formation in the Evansville area is NOX-limited and
ozone reduction through NOX scavenging is not an issue.
Ozone levels have declined as regional NOX emissions have
decreased. The ozone decrease is most evident at the Inglefield
monitor, AIRS 18-163-0013 (Vanderburgh County). The ozone decrease in
this area is consistently greater than at other monitoring sites in the
Evansville area, probably due to regional NOX emission
reductions in an area that is NOX-limited.

Response 10

    Although the NOX SIP call was issued by the EPA in 2001,
the State of Indiana can claim credit for the regional NOX
emission reductions that have resulted from the implementation of the
NOX emission control rules adopted by the State to comply
with the NOX SIP call. The State of Indiana adopted
NOX emission control regulations which were implemented
beginning in the period of 2003-2004, and which will result in
additional reductions in regional NOX emissions through 2007
or later. The State can take credit for these federally enforceable
emission reductions when considering the emission reductions that led
to the air quality improvement in the Evansville area. The State may
also consider these emission reductions in its maintenance
demonstration, to the extent that such emission reductions are
permanent, enforceable, and will continue to occur after the attainment
period (after 2002-2004).
    The EPA and the Clean Air Act do not require the State to consider
only emission reductions resulting from rules adopted after designation
of areas as nonattainment of the NAAQS. The State may consider emission
reductions resulting from ``existing'' regulations as long as the
emission reductions themselves occur subsequent to the period of NAAQS
violation upon which a nonattainment designation is based. Since the
nonattainment designation for the Evansville area was based on ozone
data for the period of 2001-2003, the State can consider the emission
reductions that occurred subsequent to any year in this period. The
State is correct in taking credit for the NOX emission
reductions that resulted from the implementation of the State's
emission control regulations under the NOX SIP call. In
addition, EPA has implemented several programs that have resulted in
reduced emissions in recent

years. For cars and light trucks, EPA has instituted the National Low
Emissions Vehicle (NLEV) program, which went into effect nationally in
2001, and EPA's Tier 2 rules, which went into effect in 2004. In
addition, Tier 2 standards for nonroad diesel engines were phased in
between 2001 and 2004. Over time, the phase-in of these programs has
resulted in reductions in emissions as new vehicles have replaced
older, higher-polluting vehicles. Further emission reductions have
occurred as a result of implementation of EPA standards for small
spark-ignited engines (e.g., lawnmowers) and locomotives. The heavy
duty highway truck engine rule also implemented emission reductions
beginning in 2004. See also the discussion in our September 9, 2005
proposed rule, 70 FR 53610-53611 and the responses to Comments 1 and 4
above.
    As noted in the State's June 2, 2005 submittal, significant
NOX emission reductions have occurred in the southwestern
Indiana area as a result of the implementation of State NOX
emission control rules for electric generating units. The State
NOX emission control rules were adopted and implemented to
comply with EPA's acid rain control requirements and EPA's
NOX SIP call. On December 6, 2005 and December 7, 2005, IDEM
submitted to the EPA more detailed information to document the
NOX emission reductions resulting from the implementation of
these NOX emission control regulations. Based on ozone
season-specific, facility-specific NOX emissions data, IDEM
has determined that electric generating unit NOX emissions
have steadily declined between 1998 and 2005. Table 4 documents the
change in ozone season NOX emissions for these facilities.

 Table 4.--Ozone Season NOX Emissions from Electric Generating Units in
       Southwestern Indiana\1\ in Units of Tons per Ozone Season.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         NOX Emissions
                         Year                           (tons per ozone
                                                            season)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1998.................................................              66707
1999.................................................              63242
2000.................................................              58852
2001.................................................              57922
2002.................................................              52719
2003.................................................              47784
2004.................................................              30427
2005.................................................             22294
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Southwestern Indiana includes Dubois, Gibson, Pike, Posey, Spencer,
  Van der burgh, and Warrick Counties.

    These data clearly show the reduction in regional NOX
emissions that resulted between 2001-2003, the ozone nonattainment
period, and 2002-2004, the attainment period. These data also show
continued reduction of regional NOX emissions through 2005.
Note that the NOX emissions from electric generating units
in southwestern Indiana declined by 47.5 percent between 2001 (a year
during the 2001-2003 nonattainment period) and 2004 (a year during the
2002-2004 attainment period). These emissions decreased an additional
26.7 percent between 2004 and 2005 as a result of the implementation of
Indiana's NOX emission control regulations in compliance
with EPA's NOX SIP call. These emission reductions have
resulted from the implementation of permanent and enforceable emission
reduction requirements, and have contributed to the attainment of the
8-hour ozone standard in the Evansville area and to maintenance of this
standard in this area. Emission reductions from these sources will
continue through 2007 and beyond, and will be supplemented by CAIR
through 2015 and beyond.
    Besides the Federal and State emission control programs mentioned
above, permanent and enforceable emission reductions have been achieved
through other means, such as enforcement of existing regulations. A
prime example of such emission reductions resulted from an enforcement
action against the Southern Gas and Electric Company, Incorporated
(SIGECO). In June 2003, the United States and SIGECO entered into a
consent decree in which, among other things, SIGECO agreed to implement
certain NOX control measures at its F.B. Culley Station in
Warrick County. U.S. v. SIGECO, No. IP99-1692 (S.D. Ind.). More
specifically, by no later than September 1, 2003, the Company was
required to continuously operate Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)
emission controls at the Culley Station Unit 3 to reduce NOX
emissions. In addition, by December 31, 2006, SIGECO is required to
undertake additional, substantial NOX emission reduction
measures at Culley Station Unit 1, which will help to maintain the 8-
hour ozone standard in the Evansville area. These measures collectively
should result in a total NOX emission reduction of 4,000
tons per year at this facility.
    We agree with Dr. Alexandrovich, the Vanderburgh County Ozone
Officer, that the Evansville area appears to be NOX-limited.
This explains why peak ozone concentrations in the area have decreased
as state NOX rules controlling emissions from electric
generating units (power plants) and other major combustion sources have
been implemented. We also agree with this commenter that other
federally enforceable emission controls on regional emissions from
mobile sources and fuels, and through CAIR, will be implemented in the
future and that these emission controls will further lower ozone
concentrations in the Evansville area.
    It should be noted that the EPA and other organizations and
institutions conducted considerable ozone modeling analyses to support
the NOX SIP call. These analyses supported the conclusion
that the NOX SIP call, and the state regulations resulting
from the NOX SIP call, would result in regional
NOX emission reductions and significantly lower ozone levels
east of the Mississippi River. We disagree with the commenter's claim
that the benefits of the NOX SIP call are dubious. The
commenter has presented no data or evidence to support this claim. We,
along with the State, believe that the NOX SIP call was
instrumental in the attainment of the ozone NAAQS in the Evansville
area. The State's NOX emission control regulations helped to
attain the ozone NAAQS in the Evansville area, and will help to
maintain the ozone NAAQS in this area.
    To demonstrate that regional VOC and NOX emission
reductions have contributed to attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard
in the Evansville area and will contribute to maintenance of the 8-hour
ozone standard, IDEM used ozone modeling results from various studies
to assess ozone impacts resulting from the implementation of regional
emission controls. In the State's June 2, 2005 ozone redesignation
request for the Evansville area, IDEM draws the following conclusions
from the various ozone modeling analyses that have addressed the
Midwest:
    EPA modeling analysis for the Heavy Duty Engine rule. EPA conducted
modeling for Tier II vehicle and low-sulfur fuels to support the final
rulemaking for the Heavy Duty Engine (HDE) and Vehicle Standards and
Highway Diesel Fuel Rule. This modeling, in part, addressed ozone
levels in Indiana, including the Evansville area. A base year of 1996
was modeled, and the impacts of fuel changes and the NOX SIP
call were addressed for high ozone episodes in 1995. The modeling
supports the conclusion that fuel improvements and the NOX
SIP call result in significant ozone improvements (lower projected peak
ozone concentrations) in the

Evansville area. Using the modeling results to determine Relative
Reduction Factors (RRFs) \13\ and considering the 2001-2003 ozone
design values for each monitor in the Evansville area, IDEM projected
the 2007 ozone design values for the monitoring sites. The worst-case
monitoring site (based on the 2001-2003 ozone design values), the
Alcoa-Yankeetown monitoring site, was projected to have a 2007 ozone
design value of 0.071 ppm, down from a 2001-2003 ozone design value of
0.085 ppm. All monitoring sites in the Evansville area were projected
to experience significant decreases in peak ozone concentrations
between 2001-2003 and 2007. The highest peak ozone concentration in
2007 was projected to be 0.073 ppm at the Evansville-Mill Road
monitoring site, with a projected 2007 ozone design value of 0.073 ppm.
All monitoring sites were projected to experience 12 to 17 percent
decreases in peak 8-hour ozone concentrations between 2001-2003 and
2007. Therefore, the NOX SIP call and the fuel modifications
considered in the ozone modeling were found to significantly improve
the ozone levels in the Evansville area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Relative Reduction Factors are fractional changes in peak
ozone concentrations projected to occur as a result of assumed
changes in precursor emissions resulting from the implementation of
emission control strategies. Relative Reduction Factors are derived
through modeling of peak ozone concentrations before and after
implementation emission controls and are applied to monitored ozone
concentrations to project post-control peak ozone levels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    LADCO modeling analysis for the 8-hour ozone standard assessment.
LADCO has performed ozone modeling to evaluate the effect of the
NOX SIP call and Tier II/Low Sulfur Fuel Rule on 2007 ozone
levels in the Lake Michigan area, which includes the Evansville area.
Like the EPA modeling discussed above, this modeling indicates that the
2001-2003 ozone design values for the ozone monitoring sites in the
Evansville area would be significantly reduced to below-standard levels
in 2007 as the result of the implementation of the NOX SIP
call and the Tier II/Low Sulfur Fuel Rule.
    EPA and LADCO modeling analysis for CAIR. EPA conducted modeling in
support of the CAIR rulemaking. IDEM used the EPA modeling results and
2000-2002 monitored ozone design values for Posey, Vanderburgh, and
Warrick Counties to project 2010 ozone design values with and without
the implementation of CAIR. The implementation of CAIR was projected to
slightly decrease the 2010 ozone design values in these counties.
Similar to EPA, LADCO modeled base period and future ozone levels to
assess the impact of CAIR in the Lake Michigan area. IDEM used the
LADCO ozone modeling results along with the 2001-2003 ozone design
values for the ozone monitors in the Evansville area to derive RRFs and
to project 2010 ozone design values. All projected 2010 ozone design
values were significantly below the 8-hour ozone standard, with the
worst-case 2010 ozone design value projected to be 0.075 ppm at the
Alcoa-Yankeetown monitoring site. These modeling results show that CAIR
will further reduce peak ozone levels in the Evansville area and that,
with the implementation of the NOX SIP call (also factored
into EPA's and LADCO's ozone modeling) and CAIR, the Evansville area
will continue to maintain the 8-hour ozone standard.
    The modeling analyses and demonstrations discussed above provide
further support for our determination that the area will maintain the
8-hour ozone standard. See the response to Comment 5.
    With regard to the negative comment regarding NOX
scavenging, it is noted that NOX scavenging refers to a
decrease in local ozone concentrations associated with significant
local NOX emissions or with increases in local
NOX emissions (some ozone is converted to oxygen and
nitrogen dioxide due to reaction with NOX). Similarly, there
can be an increase in local ozone concentrations associated with a
decrease in local NOX emissions. NOX scavenging
is always a possibility near large NOX sources. This does
not appear to be a factor in this case. Please note that any such
NOX scavenging, if a factor, was likely to have been present
in the area when the 8-hour ozone NAAQS was originally violated in
2001-2003, when the EPA designated the Evansville area as nonattainment
for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. In the period of 2001-2003, the pre-
NOX SIP call emissions would have been relatively high and
could have decreased local ozone concentrations to some degree; yet the
area violated the ozone standard. Beginning in 2003-2004 and later,
NOX emissions from power plants would have been lower due to
implementation of NOX emission control regulations resulting
from the NOX SIP call. If NOX scavenging were a
factor, local ozone concentrations should have increased, yet the
Evansville area attained the ozone standard. Thus, it is unlikely that
NOX scavenging due to power plant emissions is an
explanation for why the Evansville area ozone monitors are now
recording attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard. (In addition, as
pointed out by Dr. Alexandrovich, the area appears to be
NOX-limited; as such, future regional NOX
emission reductions will further lower ozone concentrations in this
area.) Finally, the commenter concerned about NOX scavenging
has provided no data showing that such has occurred.
    For all of the above reasons, and for the reasons stated in our
September 9, 2005 proposed rule, we believe that the criterion set
forth in section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the Clean Air Act is satisfied,
and that ``the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of
the applicable implementation plan and applicable Federal air pollutant
control regulations and other permanent and enforceable reductions.''
EPA, thus, is not acting illegally in approving the State's ozone
redesignation request for the Evansville area.

VI. What Are Our Final Actions?

    EPA is making a determination that Vanderburgh and Warrick Counties
have attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and EPA is approving the
redesignation of Vanderburgh and Warrick Counties from nonattainment to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. After evaluating Indiana's
redesignation request, EPA has determined that it meets the
redesignation criteria set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.
The final approval of this redesignation request changes the official
designation for Vanderburgh and Warrick Counties from nonattainment to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard.
    EPA is also approving the maintenance plan SIP revision for
Vanderburgh and Warrick Counties. Approval of the maintenance plan is
based on Indiana's demonstration that the plan meets the requirements
of section 175A of the CAA, as described more fully above.
Additionally, EPA is finding adequate and approving the 2015 MVEBs
submitted by Indiana in conjunction with the redesignation request.
    We have reviewed comments on our September 9, 2005 proposed rule,
and have found no comments that would cause us to reverse the actions
we documented in the proposed rule. Therefore, all proposed actions are
being finalized here.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Review

Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and

therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget.

Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    Because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866 or a ``significant energy action,'' this action
is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This action merely approves state law as meeting federal
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. Redesignation of an area to attainment under
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act does not impose any new
requirements on small entities. Redesignation is an action that affects
the status of a geographical area and does not impose any new
regulatory requirements on sources. Accordingly, the Administrator
certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state
law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that
required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).

Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments

    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action also does not have Federalism implications because it
does not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the
relationship between the national government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999). Redesignation is an action that merely affects the status of
a geographical area, and does not impose any new requirements on
sources, or allows a state to avoid adopting or implementing additional
requirements, and does not alter the relationship or distribution of
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act.

Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks

    This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.

National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
state to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Redesignation is an
action that affects the status of a geographical area but does not
impose any new requirements on sources. Thus, the requirements of
section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.

Environmental Justice

    Executive Order 12898 establishes a Federal policy for
incorporating environmental justice into Federal agency actions by
directing agencies to identify and address, as appropriate,
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority and
low-income populations. As explained elsewhere in this document (see
responses to Comments 5 and 9), today's action is designed to prevent
violations of the health-based national ambient air quality standard.
It does not result in the relaxation of control measures on existing
sources and therefore will not cause emissions increases from those
sources. Overall, as discussed in response to Comments 5 and 9,
emissions in the area are projected to decline following the
redesignation. Thus, today's action will not have disproportionately
high and adverse effects on any communities in the area, including
minority and low-income communities.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).

Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 27, 2006. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See Section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Volatile
organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

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

    Dated: December 15, 2005.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

0
Parts 52 and 81, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations
is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart P--Indiana

0
2. Section 52.777 is amended by adding paragraph (ee) to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.777  Control strategy: photochemical oxidants (hydrocarbons).

* * * * *
    (ee) Approval--On June 2, 2005, Indiana submitted a request to
redesignate Vanderburgh and Warrick Counties to attainment of the 8-
hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard. This request was
supplemented with a submittal dated October 20, 2005. As part of the
redesignation request, the State submitted a maintenance plan as
required by section 175A of the Clean Air Act. Elements of the section
175 maintenance plan include a contingency plan and an obligation to
submit a subsequent maintenance plan revision in 8 years as required by
the Clean Air Act. Also included were motor vehicle emission budgets
for use to determine transportation conformity in Vanderburgh and
Warrick Counties. The 2015 motor vehicle emission budgets are 4.20 tons
per day for VOC and 5.40 tons per day for NOX for both
counties combined.

PART 81--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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

0
2. Section 81.315 is amended by revising the entry for Evansville, IN:
Vanderburgh and Warrick Counties in the table entitled ``Indiana Ozone
(8-Hour Standard)'' to read as follows:

Sec.  81.315  Indiana.

* * * * *

                                                             Indiana Ozone (8-Hour Standard)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Designation \a\                                         Classification
             Designated area             ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Date \1\                      Type                      Date \1\                      Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
Evansville, IN:

    Vanderburgh County..................      1/30/06  Attainment.
    Warrick County......................      1/30/06  Attainment.

                                                                     * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
\1\ This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.

[FR Doc. 05-24542 Filed 12-28-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P