[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 160 (Monday, August 19, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42881-42887]
[FR Doc No: 2019-17669]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2019-0216; FRL-9998-44-Region 5]

Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Second Limited Maintenance Plans for
1997 Ozone NAAQS

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA), the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a state implementation
plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Ohio. On April 12, 2019,
the state submitted the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS or standard) Limited Maintenance Plan (LMP) for the
Canton-Massillon (Stark County), Lima (Allen County), and Toledo (Lucas
and Wood Counties) areas and the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-
Marietta [OH-WV] (Washington County), Steubenville-Weirton [OH-WV]
(Jefferson County), Wheeling [OH-WV] (Belmont County), and Youngstown-
Warren-Sharon [OH-PA] (Columbiana, Mahoning, and Trumbull Counties)
multi-state areas. EPA is proposing to approve these Ohio LMPs because
they provide for the maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS through
the end of the second 10-year portion of the maintenance period. The
effect of this action would be to make certain commitments related to
maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in these areas federally
enforceable as part of the Ohio SIP.

DATES: Written comments must be received at the address below on or
before September 18, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2019-0216 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the For Further Information Contact section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Hatten, Environmental
Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms ``we'',
``us'', and ``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. What action is EPA taking?
II. What is the background for these actions?

III. EPA's Evaluation of Ohio's SIP Submittal
    1. Attainment Emissions Inventory
    2. Maintenance Demonstration
    3. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
    4. Contingency Plan
IV. Transportation Conformity
V. Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What action is EPA taking?

    Under the CAA, EPA is proposing to approve the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS LMPs for the Canton-Massillon (Stark County), Lima (Allen
County), and Toledo (Lucas and Wood Counties) areas and the Ohio
portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta [OH-WV] (Washington County),
Steubenville-Weirton [OH-WV] (Jefferson County), Wheeling [OH-WV]
(Belmont County), and Youngstown-Warren-Sharon [OH-PA](Columbiana,
Mahoning, and Trumbull Counties) multi-state areas, submitted by Ohio
on April 12, 2019. On June 15, 2004 these areas were designated as
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Canton-Massillon
(Stark County), Lima (Allen County), Parkersburg-Marietta (Washington
County), Steubenville-Weirton (Jefferson County), and Wheeling (Belmont
County) areas were redesignated to attainment of that standard on May
16, 2007 (72 FR 27647). The Toledo (Lucas and Wood Counties) and
Youngstown-Warren-Sharon (Columbiana, Mahoning, and Trumbull Counties)
areas were redesignated to attainment of that standard, respectively,
on August 9, 2007 (72 FR 44784), and June 12, 2007 (72 FR 32190).
    These LMPs for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, submitted by Ohio, are
designed to maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS through the end of the
second 10-year period of the maintenance period. EPA is proposing to
approve the LMPs because they meet all applicable requirements under
CAA sections 110 and 175A.

II. What is the background for these actions?

    Ground-level ozone is formed when oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) react in the
presence of sunlight. These two pollutants, referred to as ozone
precursors, are emitted by many types of pollution sources, including
on-road and off-road motor vehicles and engines, power plants and
industrial facilities, and smaller area sources such as lawn and garden
equipment and paints. Scientific evidence indicates that adverse public
health effects occur following exposure to ozone, particularly in
children and adults with lung disease. Breathing air containing ozone
can reduce lung function and inflame airways, which can increase
respiratory symptoms and aggravate asthma or other lung diseases.
    Ozone exposure also has been associated with increased
susceptibility to respiratory infections, medication use, doctor
visits, and emergency department visits and hospital admissions for
individuals with lung disease. Ozone exposure also increases the risk
of premature death from heart or lung disease. Children are at
increased risk from exposure to ozone because their lungs are still
developing and they are more likely to be active outdoors, which
increases their exposure.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See ``Fact Sheet, Proposal to Revise the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards for Ozone,'' January 6, 2010 and 75 FR 2938
(January 19, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 1979, under section 109 of the CAA, EPA established primary and
secondary NAAQS for ozone at 0.12 parts per million (ppm), averaged
over a 1-hour period. 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979). On July 18, 1997,
EPA revised the primary and secondary NAAQS for ozone to set the
acceptable level of ozone in the ambient air at 0.08 ppm, averaged over
an 8-hour period. 62 FR 38856 (July 18, 1997).\2\ EPA established the
8-hour ozone NAAQS based on scientific evidence demonstrating that
ozone causes adverse health effects at lower concentrations and over
longer periods of time than was understood when the pre-existing 1-hour
ozone NAAQS was set. EPA determined that the 1997 8-hour ozone standard
would be more protective of human health, especially for children and
adults who are active outdoors, and individuals with a pre-existing
respiratory disease, such as asthma.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ In March 2008, EPA completed another review of the primary
and secondary ozone standards and tightened them further by lowering
the level for both to 0.075 ppm. 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).
Additionally, in October 2015, EPA completed a review of the primary
and secondary ozone standards and tightened them by lowering the
level for both to 0.70 ppm. 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, EPA is required
by the CAA to designate areas throughout the nation as attaining or not
attaining the NAAQS. On April 15, 2004, EPA designated the Ohio areas
as nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and the designations
became effective on June 15, 2004. Under the CAA, states are also
required to adopt and submit SIPs to implement, maintain, and enforce
the NAAQS in designated nonattainment areas and throughout the state.
    When a nonattainment area has three years of complete, certified
air quality data that has been determined to attain the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS, and the area has met other required criteria described in
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, the state can submit to EPA a request
to be redesignated to attainment, referred to as a ``maintenance
area''.\3\ One of the criteria for redesignation is to have an approved
maintenance plan under CAA section 175A. The maintenance plan must
demonstrate that the area will continue to maintain the standard for
the period extending 10 years after redesignation and contain such
additional measures as necessary to ensure maintenance and such
contingency provisions as necessary to assure that violations of the
standard will be promptly corrected. At the end of the eighth year
after the effective date of the redesignation, the state must also
submit a second maintenance plan to ensure ongoing maintenance of the
standard for an additional 10 years. See CAA section 175A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA sets out the requirements
for redesignation. They include attainment of the NAAQS, full
approval under section 110(k) of the applicable SIP, determination
that improvement in air quality is a result of permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions, demonstration that the state
has met all applicable section 110 and part D requirements, and a
fully approved maintenance plan under CAA section 175A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has published long-standing guidance for states on developing
maintenance plans.\4\ The Calcagni memo provides that states may
generally demonstrate maintenance by either performing air quality
modeling to show that the future mix of sources and emission rates will
not cause a violation of the NAAQS or by showing that future emissions
of a pollutant and its precursors will not exceed the level of
emissions during a year when the area was attaining the NAAQS (i.e.,
attainment year inventory). See Calcagni memo at 9. EPA clarified in
three subsequent guidance memos that certain nonattainment areas could
meet the CAA section 175A requirement to provide for maintenance by
demonstrating that the area's design value \5\ was well below the NAAQS
and that the historical stability of the area's air quality levels
showed that the area was unlikely to violate the NAAQS in

the future.\6\ EPA refers to this streamlined demonstration of
maintenance as an LMP. EPA has interpreted CAA section 175A as
permitting this option because section 175A of the CAA defines few
specific content requirements for maintenance plans, and in EPA's
experience implementing the various NAAQS, areas that qualify for an
LMP and have approved LMPs have rarely, if ever, experienced subsequent
violations of the NAAQS. As noted in the LMP guidance memoranda, states
seeking an LMP must still submit the other maintenance plan elements
outlined in the Calcagni memo, including: An attainment emissions
inventory, provisions for the continued operation of the ambient air
quality monitoring network, verification of continued attainment, and a
contingency plan in the event of a future violation of the NAAQS.
Moreover, states seeking an LMP must still submit their section 175A
maintenance plan as a revision to their state implementation plan, with
all attendant notice and comment procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Calcagni, John, Director, Air Quality Management Division,
EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, ``Procedures for
Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' September
4, 1992 (Calcagni memo).
    \5\ The ozone design value for a monitoring site is the 3-year
average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average
ozone concentrations. The design value for an ozone nonattainment
area is the highest design value of any monitoring site in the area.
    \6\ See ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable
Ozone Nonattainment Areas'' from Sally L. Shaver, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), dated November 16, 1994;
``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO
Nonattainment Areas'' from Joseph Paisie, OAQPS, dated October 6,
1995; and ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Moderate
PM10 Nonattainment Areas'' from Lydia Wegman, OAQPS,
dated August 9, 2001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While the LMP guidance memoranda was originally written with
respect to certain NAAQS,\7\ EPA has extended the LMP interpretation of
section 175A to other NAAQS and pollutants not specifically covered by
the previous guidance memos.\8\ In this case, EPA is proposing to
approve the Ohio LMPs, because the state has made a showing, consistent
with EPA's prior LMP guidance, that each of the Ohio area's ozone
concentrations are well below the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and have been
historically stable. Ohio has submitted LMPs for the areas of Canton-
Massillon (Stark County), Lima (Allen County), Toledo (Lucas and Wood
Counties), and the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta (Washington
County), Steubenville-Weirton (Jefferson County), Wheeling (Belmont
County), Youngstown-Warren-Sharon (Columbiana, Mahoning, and Trumbull
Counties) to fulfill the second 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS maintenance
plan requirement in the CAA. Our evaluation of these 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS LMPs is presented in section III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The prior memos addressed: Unclassifiable areas under the 1-
hour ozone NAAQS, nonattainment areas for the PM10
(particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 10
microns) NAAQS, and nonattainment areas for the carbon monoxide
NAAQS.
    \8\ See, e.g., 79 FR 41900 (July 18, 2014) (Approval of second
ten-year LMP for Grant County 1971 SO2 maintenance area).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under CAA section 175A(b), states must submit a revision to the
first maintenance plan eight years after redesignation to provide for
maintenance of the NAAQS for 10 additional years following the end of
the first 10-year period. EPA's final implementation rule for the 2008
ozone NAAQS revoked the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and stated that one
consequence of revocation was that areas that had been redesignated to
attainment (i.e., maintenance areas) for the 1997 standard no longer
needed to submit second 10-year maintenance plans under CAA section
175A(b).\9\ In South Coast Air Quality Management District v. EPA, the
D.C. Circuit vacated EPA's interpretation that, because of the
revocation of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, second maintenance plans
were not required for ``orphan maintenance areas,'' i.e., areas that
had been redesignated to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
maintenance areas and were designated attainment for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS. South Coast, 882 F.3d 1138 (D.C. Cir. 2018). Thus, states with
these ``orphan maintenance areas'' under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
must submit maintenance plans for the second maintenance period.
Accordingly, on April 12, 2019, Ohio submitted a second maintenance
plan in the form of an LMP for the areas of Canton-Massillon (Stark
County), Lima (Allen County), Toledo (Lucas and Wood Counties),
Parkersburg-Marietta (Washington County), Steubenville-Weirton
(Jefferson County), Wheeling (Belmont County), Youngstown-Warren-Sharon
(Columbiana, Mahoning and Trumbull Counties). These LMPs show that each
area is expected to remain in attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
through the end of the last year of the second 10-year maintenance
period, i.e., through the end of the full 20-year maintenance period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See 80 FR 12315 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. EPA's Evaluation of Ohio's SIP Submittal

    EPA has reviewed the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS LMPs which are
designed to maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS within the areas of
Canton-Massillon (Stark County, OH), Lima (Allen County, OH), Toledo
(Lucas and Wood Counties, OH), and the Ohio portion in the areas of
Parkersburg-Marietta (Washington County), Steubenville-Weirton
(Jefferson County), Wheeling (Belmont County), Youngstown-Warren-Sharon
(Columbiana, Mahoning and Trumbull Counties) through the end of the 20-
year maintenance period beyond redesignation, as required under CAA
section 175A(b). The following is a summary of EPA's interpretation of
the requirements \10\ and EPA's evaluation of how each requirement is
met.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Calcagni memo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Attainment Emissions Inventory

    For maintenance plans, a state should develop a comprehensive,
accurate inventory of actual emissions for an attainment year to
identify the level of emissions which is sufficient to maintain the
NAAQS. A state should develop this inventory consistent with EPA's most
recent guidance on emissions inventory development. For ozone, the
inventory should be based on typical summer day emissions of VOCs and
NOX, as these pollutants are precursors to ozone formation.
The Ohio LMP's ozone attainment inventories reflect typical summer day
emissions in 2014. Table 1 presents a summary of the inventories for
2014 contained in the maintenance plans.

                              Table 1--Typical 2014 Summer Day VOC and NO Emissions
                                                   [Tons/day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                NO  emissions
                     Area                                Source category          VOC  emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Canton-Massillon (OH).........................  Nonroad.........................            6.46            4.74
                                                Onroad..........................            7.59           12.66
                                                Point...........................            2.87            3.81
                                                Area............................           14.85            3.31
                                                                                -------------------------------

                                                  Total Area                               31.77           24.52
Lima (OH).....................................  Nonroad.........................            1.35            1.57
                                                Onroad..........................            2.29            4.46
                                                Point...........................            5.08            7.62
                                                Area............................            4.55            1.03
                                                                                -------------------------------
                                                  Total Area                               13.27           14.68
Parkersburg-Marietta (OH-WV)..................  Nonroad.........................            2.82            1.55
                                                Onroad..........................            4.00            7.71
                                                Point...........................            2.84           16.81
                                                Area............................            8.29            6.21
                                                                                -------------------------------
                                                  Total Area                               17.95           32.28
Steubenville-Weirton (OH-WV)..................  Nonroad.........................            2.07            1.09
                                                Onroad..........................            2.31            3.84
                                                Point...........................            2.13           37.54
                                                Area............................           15.76            4.53
                                                                                -------------------------------
                                                  Total Area                               22.27           47.00
Toledo (OH)...................................  Nonroad.........................            8.70            8.41
                                                Onroad..........................           11.51           22.62
                                                Point...........................            7.37           12.48
                                                Area............................           21.19            9.37
                                                                                -------------------------------
                                                  Total Area                               48.77           52.88
Wheeling (OH-WV)..............................  Nonroad.........................            2.69            1.26
                                                Onroad..........................            4.36            8.50
                                                Point...........................            1.25           24.68
                                                Area............................           27.64            5.97
                                                                                -------------------------------
                                                  Total Area                               35.94           40.41
Youngstown-Warren-Sharon (OH-PA)..............  Nonroad.........................            9.71            6.68
                                                Onroad..........................           13.33           27.92
                                                Point...........................            5.01            7.07
                                                Area............................           40.73           10.53
                                                                                -------------------------------
                                                  Total Area                               68.78           52.20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ohio used 2014 summer day emissions from ``the EPA 2014 version
7.0'' modeling platform as the basis for the attainment inventory.
These data are based on the most recently available National Emissions
Inventory (2014 NEI version 2).
    Based on our review of the methods, models, and assumptions used by
Ohio to develop the VOC and NOX estimates, we propose to
find that the Ohio 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS LMP areas include a
comprehensive, reasonably accurate inventory of actual ozone precursor
emissions in attainment year 2014, and propose to conclude that the
plan's inventory is acceptable for the purposes of a subsequent
maintenance plan under CAA section 175A(b).

2. Maintenance Demonstration

    The maintenance plan demonstration requirement is considered to be
satisfied in a LMP if the state can provide sufficient weight of
evidence indicating that air quality in the area is well below the
level of the standard, that past air quality trends have been shown to
be stable, and that the probability of the area experiencing a
violation over the second 10-year maintenance period is low.\11\ These
criteria are evaluated below with regard to the Ohio areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable Ozone
Nonattainment Areas'' from Sally L. Shaver, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards (OAQPS), dated November 16, 1994; ``Limited
Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment Areas''
from Joseph Paisie, OAQPS, dated October 6, 1995; and ``Limited
Maintenance Plan Option for Moderate PM10 Nonattainment
Areas'' from Lydia Wegman, OAQPS, dated August 9, 2001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

a. Evaluation of Ozone Air Quality Levels
    To attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the three-year average of
the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations
(design value) at each monitor within an area must not exceed 0.08 ppm.
Based on the rounding convention described in 40 CFR part 50, appendix
I, the standard is attained if the design value is 0.084 ppm or below.
Consistent with prior guidance, EPA believes that if the most recent
air quality design value for the area is at a level that is well below
the NAAQS (e.g., below 85% of the standard, or in this case below 0.071
ppm), then EPA considers the state to have met the section 175A
requirement for a demonstration that the area will maintain the NAAQS
for the requisite period. Such a demonstration assumes continued
applicability of Prevention of Significant Deterioration requirements,
any control measures already in the SIP, and Federal measures will
remain in place through the end of the second 10-year maintenance
period, absent a showing consistent with section 110(l) that such
measures are not necessary to assure maintenance.
    Table 2 presents the design values for each monitor site in the
subject areas over the 2015-2017 period. For the multi-state areas that
Ohio is addressing, Table 2 includes all applicable monitors in the
area, including monitors located in other

states' portions of the area, to address whether the entire area is at
or below 85 percent of the NAAQS. These monitoring sites have been well
below the level of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS over the entire first
10-year maintenance period. As shown below, the most current design
value for all sites continues to be below the level of 85% of the
NAAQS, consistent with prior LMP guidance.

                                 Table 2--1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Design Values
                                               [Part per million]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Design value
               Area                       County          AQS site ID     (DV)  2016-    DV <0.071 ppm  eligible
                                                                             2018                  LMP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Canton-Massillon (OH)............  Stark..............     39-151-0016           0.069  Yes.
Canton-Massillon (OH)............  Stark..............     39-151-0022           0.066  Yes.
Canton-Massillon (OH)............  Stark..............     39-151-4005           0.068  Yes.
Lima (OH)........................  Allen..............     39-003-0009           0.067  Yes.
Parkersburg-Marietta (OH-WV).....  Washington.........     39-167-0004           0.064  Yes.
Parkersburg-Marietta (OH-WV).....  Wood (WV)..........    54-107-10021           0.065  Yes.
Steubenville-Weirton (OH-WV).....  Jefferson..........     39-081-0017           0.062  Yes.
Steubenville-Weirton (OH-WV).....  Hancock (WV).......     54-029-0009           0.066  Yes.
Toledo (OH)......................  Lucas..............     39-095-0024           0.066  Yes.
Toledo (OH)......................  Lucas..............     39-095-0027           0.064  Yes.
Toledo (OH)......................  Wood...............     39-173-0003           0.064  Yes.
Wheeling (OH-WV).................  Belmont............     54-069-0010           0.067  Yes.
Youngstown-Warren-Sharon (OH-PA).  Mahoning...........     39-099-0013           0.059  Yes.
Youngstown-Warren-Sharon (OH-PA).  Trumbull...........     39-155-0011           0.068  Yes.
Youngstown-Warren-Sharon (OH-PA).  Trumbull...........     39-155-0013           0.066  Yes.
Youngstown-Warren-Sharon (OH-PA).  Mercer (PA)........     42-085-0100           0.068  Yes.
Youngstown-Warren-Sharon (OH-PA).  Mercer (PA)........     42-085-9991           0.065  Yes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, the areas of Canton-Massillon (Stark County, OH), Lima
(Allen County, OH), Toledo (Lucas and Wood counties of OH), and the
portions of Ohio within Parkersburg-Marietta OH-WV (Washington County),
Steubenville-Weirton OH-WV (Jefferson County), Wheeling OH-WV (Belmont
County), and Youngstown-Warren-Sharon OH-PA(Columbiana, Mahoning and
Trumbull Counties) multi-states areas are eligible for the LMP option,
and we propose to find that the long record of monitored ozone
concentrations that attain the NAAQS, together with the continuation of
existing VOC and NOX emissions control programs, adequately
provide for the maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the areas
through the second 10-year maintenance period and beyond.
3. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
    EPA periodically reviews the ozone monitoring network that Ohio
operates and maintains, in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. This network
is consistent with the ambient air monitoring network assessment and
plan developed by Ohio that is submitted annually to EPA and that
follows a public notification and review process. Ohio has committed to
continue to maintain a network in accordance with EPA requirements.
4. Contingency Plan
    The contingency plan provisions are designed to promptly correct or
prevent a violation of the NAAQS that might occur after redesignation
of an area to attainment. Section 175A of the CAA 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 maintenance plan should
identify the contingency measures to be adopted, a schedule and
procedure for adoption and implementation of the contingency measures,
and a time limit for action by the state. The state should also
identify specific indicators to be used to determine when the
contingency measures need to be adopted and implemented. The
maintenance plan must include a requirement that the state will
implement all pollution control measures that were contained in the SIP
before redesignation of the area to attainment. See section 175A(d) of
the CAA.
    Ohio's contingency plan defines a warning level and action level
response. A warning level shall be prompted whenever an annual fourth
high monitored value of 0.088 ppm occurs in a single ozone season
within the maintenance area. The action level response shall be
prompted whenever a two year average fourth high monitored value of 84
ppb or greater occurs within the maintenance area. A violation of the
standard (three year average fourth high monitored value of 84 ppb or
greater occurs within the maintenance area) shall prompt an action
level response. In the event that the action level is triggered and is
not due to an exceptional event, malfunction, or noncompliance with a
permit condition or rule requirement, Ohio will determine additional
control measures needed to assure future attainment of NAAQS for ozone.
In this case, measures that can be implemented in a short time will be
selected in order to be in place within eighteen 18 months from the
close of the ozone season that prompted the action level.
    Contingency measures to be considered will be selected from a
comprehensive list of measures deemed appropriate and effective at the
time the selection is made. Listed below are example measures that may
be considered. The selection of measures will be based upon cost-
effectiveness, emission reduction potential, economic and social
considerations or other factors that Ohio deems appropriate. Ohio will
solicit input from all interested and affected persons in the
maintenance area prior to selecting appropriate contingency measures.
The listed contingency measures are potentially effective or proven
methods of obtaining significant reductions of ozone precursor
emissions. Because it is not possible at this time to determine what
control measure will be appropriate at an unspecified time in

the future, the list of contingency measures outlined below is not
exhaustive. Ohio anticipates that only a few of these measures will be
required.
    (1) Tighten reasonably available control technology (RACT) on
existing sources covered by EPA's Control Technique Guidelines issued
in response to the 1990 CAA Amendments.
    (2) Apply RACT requirements to smaller existing sources.
    (3) Require one or more transportation control measures sufficient
to achieve at least 0.5% reduction in actual area wide VOC emissions.
Transportation measures will be selected from the following, based upon
the factors listed above after consultation with affected local
governments:
    (a) Trip reduction programs, including, but not limited to,
employer-based transportation management plans, area wide rideshare
programs, work schedule changes, and telecommuting.
    (b) Transit improvements.
    (c) Traffic flow improvements.
    (d) Other new or innovative transportation measures not yet in
widespread use that affects state and local governments deemed
appropriate.
    (4) Apply alternative fuel and diesel retrofit programs for fleet
vehicle operations.
    (5) Require VOC or NOX emission offsets for new and
modified major sources.
    (6) Require VOC or NOX emission offsets for new and
modified minor sources.
    (7) Adopt NOX RACT requirements for existing combustion
sources.
    (8) Apply high volume, low pressure coating application
requirements for autobody facilities.
    (9) Apply requirements for cold cleaner degreaser operations (low
vapor pressure solvents).
    EPA proposes to find that Ohio's contingency measures, as well as
the commitment to continue implementing any SIP requirements, satisfy
the pertinent requirements of CAA section 175A.

IV. Transportation Conformity

    Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the CAA.
Conformity to a SIP means that transportation activities will not
produce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or
delay timely attainment of the NAAQS (CAA 176(c)(1)(B)). EPA's
conformity rule at 40 CFR part 93 requires that transportation plans,
programs and projects conform to SIPs and establish the criteria and
procedures for determining whether or not they conform. The conformity
rule generally requires a demonstration that emissions from the
Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and the Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP) are consistent with the motor vehicle emissions budget
(MVEB) contained in the control strategy SIP revision or maintenance
plan (40 CFR 93.101, 93.118, and 93.124). A MVEB is defined as ``that
portion of the total allowable emissions defined in the submitted or
approved control strategy implementation plan revision or maintenance
plan for a certain date for the purpose of meeting reasonable further
progress milestones or demonstrating attainment or maintenance of the
NAAQS, for any criteria pollutant or its precursors, allocated to
highway and transit vehicle use and emissions (40 CFR 93.101).
    Under the conformity rule, LMP areas may demonstrate conformity
without a regional emission analysis (40 CFR 93.109(e)).
    However, because LMP areas are still maintenance areas, certain
aspects of transportation conformity determinations still will be
required for transportation plans, programs and projects. Specifically,
for such determinations, RTPs, TIPs and transportation projects still
will have to demonstrate that they are fiscally constrained (40 CFR
93.108), meet the criteria for consultation (40 CFR 93.105) and
Transportation Control Measure (TCM) implementation in the conformity
rule provisions (40 CFR 93.112 and 40 CFR 93.113, respectively).
Additionally, conformity determinations for RTPs and TIPs must be
determined no less frequently than every four years, and conformity of
plan and TIP amendments and transportation projects is demonstrated in
accordance with the timing requirements specified in 40 CFR 93.104. In
addition, for projects to be approved they must come from a currently
conforming RTP and TIP (40 CFR 93.114 and 93.115).

V. Proposed Action

    Under sections 110(k) and 175A of the CAA, for the reasons set
forth above, EPA is proposing to approve the LMPs for Canton-Massillon
(Stark County), Lima (Allen County), Toledo (Lucas and Wood Counties)
areas, and the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta (Washington
County), Steubenville-Weirton (Jefferson County), Wheeling (Belmont
County), Youngstown-Warren-Sharon (Columbiana, Mahoning, and Trumbull
Counties) multi-state areas for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. These LMPs
were submitted by Ohio on April 12, 2019, as a revision to the Ohio
SIP. We find that the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS LMPs are sufficient to
provide for maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in these areas
through the second 10-year portion of the maintenance period.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because it is not a significant regulatory
action under Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical,

appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive Order
12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone,
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: August 6, 2019.
Cathy Stepp,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2019-17669 Filed 8-16-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P