[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 238 (Tuesday, December 11, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 73560-73570]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29865]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0386; FRL- 9761-5]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
West Virginia; Redesignation of the West Virginia Portion of the
Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH 1997 Annual Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
Nonattainment Area to Attainment and Approval of the Associated
Maintenance Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a redesignation request and State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of West
Virginia. The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection
(WVDEP) is requesting that the West Virginia portion of the
Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH fine particulate matter (PM2.5)
nonattainment area (Parkersburg-Marietta Area or Area) be redesignated
as attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 national ambient air
quality standard (NAAQS). The Parkersburg-Marietta Area is comprised of
Wood County and a portion of Pleasants County in West Virginia (West
Virginia portion of the Area); and Washington County in Ohio. In this
rulemaking action, EPA is proposing to approve the PM2.5
redesignation request for the West Virginia portion of the Parkersburg-
Marietta Area. EPA is also proposing to approve the maintenance plan
SIP revision that the State submitted in conjunction with its
redesignation request. The maintenance plan provides for continued
attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS for 10 years after
redesignation of the West Virginia portion of the Area. The maintenance
plan includes an insignificance determination for the on-road motor
vehicle contribution of PM2.5, nitrogen oxides
(NOX), and sulfur dioxide (SO2) for the West
Virginia portion of the Area for purposes of transportation conformity.
EPA is proposing to find that West Virginia's insignificance
determination for transportation conformity is adequate.\1\ EPA is also
proposing to find that the Area continues to attain the standard. This
action to propose approval of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS
redesignation request, maintenance plan, and insignificance
determination for transportation conformity for the West Virginia
portion of the Area is based on EPA's determination that the Area has
met the criteria for redesignation to attainment specified in the Clean
Air Act (CAA). EPA is taking separate action to propose redesignation
of the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On November 5, 2012, EPA initiated the comment period for
this proposed insignificance determination on the Office of
Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ) web site http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm) in order to allow for a
full 30 day public comment period in conjunction with this proposed
rulemaking action.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before January 10, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2012-0386 by one of the following methods:
    A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    B. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0386, Donna Mastro, Acting Associate
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2012-0386. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal
are available at the West Virginia Department of Environmental
Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street SE., Charleston,
West Virginia 25304.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marilyn Powers,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Table of Contents

I. Summary of Actions
II. Background
III. Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment
IV. Reasons for Proposing These Actions
V. Effect of These Proposed Actions
VI. Analysis of West Virginia's Redesignation Request
VII. Analysis of West Virginia's Transportation Conformity
Insignificance Determination for the Parkersburg-Marietta Area
VIII. Proposed Actions
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Summary of Actions

    On March 5, 2012, the State of West Virginia through WVDEP formally
submitted a request to redesignate the West Virginia portion of the
Area from nonattainment to attainment of the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. Concurrently, West Virginia submitted a
maintenance plan for the Area as a SIP revision to ensure continued
attainment throughout the Area over the next 10 years.
    EPA is proposing to take several actions related to redesignation
of the West Virginia portion of the Area to attainment for the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is proposing to find that the West
Virginia portion of the Area meets the requirements for redesignation
of the PM2.5 NAAQS under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.
EPA is thus proposing to approve West Virginia's request to change the
legal definition of the West Virginia portion of the Area from
nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
This action does not impact the legal definition of the Ohio portion of
the area. EPA is taking separate action to redesignate the Ohio
portion.
    EPA is also proposing to approve the maintenance plan for the West
Virginia portion of the Area as a revision to the West Virginia SIP.
Such approval is one of the CAA criteria for redesignation of an area
to attainment. The maintenance plan is designed to ensure continued
attainment in the West Virginia portion of the Area for 10 years after
redesignation. The maintenance plan includes an insignificance
determination for the on-road motor vehicle contribution of
PM2.5, NOX and SO2 in the West
Virginia portion of the Area for transportation conformity purposes.
EPA has determined that the on-road motor vehicle insignificance
finding that is included as part of West Virginia's maintenance plan
for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS is adequate, and is
proposing to approve the insignificance determination. EPA's analysis
of these proposed actions is discussed in Sections VI and VII of
today's proposed rulemaking.

II. Background

A. General

    The first air quality standards for PM2.5 were
established on July 18, 1997. 62 FR 38652 (July 18, 1997). EPA
promulgated an annual standard at a level of 15 micrograms per cubic
meter ([mu]g/m\3\), based on a three-year average of annual mean
PM2.5 concentrations. In the same rulemaking, EPA
promulgated a 24-hour standard of 65 [mu]g/m\3\, based on a three-year
average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations. On October
17, 2006, at 71 FR 61144, EPA retained the annual average standard at
15 [mu]g/m\3\ but revised the 24-hour standard to 35 [mu]g/m\3\, based
again on the three-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour
concentrations.
    On January 5, 2005, at 70 FR 944, as supplemented on April 14,
2005, at 70 FR 19844, EPA designated the Parkersburg-Marietta Area as
nonattainment for the 1997 p.m.2.5 air quality standards.
The Parkersburg-Marietta Area is comprised of Wood County and the Grant
tax district in Pleasants County, West Virginia, and Washington County
in Ohio. On November 13, 2009, at 74 FR 58688, EPA promulgated
designations for the 24-hour standard set in 2006, designating the
Parkersburg-Marietta Area as attaining this standard. In that action,
EPA also clarified the designations for the NAAQS promulgated in 1997,
stating that the Parkersburg-Marietta Area remained designated
nonattainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard, but was
designated attainment for the 1997 24-hour standard. Today's action
therefore does not address attainment of either the 1997 or the 2006
24-hour NAAQS.
    In response to legal challenges of the annual standard promulgated
in 2006, the DC Circuit remanded the 2006 annual standard to EPA for
further consideration. See American Farm Bureau Federation and National
Pork Producers Council, et al. v. EPA, 559 F.3d 512 (DC Cir. 2009).
However, given that the 1997 and 2006 annual standards are essentially
identical, attainment of the 1997 annual standard would also indicate
attainment of the remanded 2006 annual standard. Since the Parkersburg-
Marietta Area is designated nonattainment only for the annual standard
promulgated in 1997, today's action addresses redesignation to
attainment only for this standard.
    In a final rulemaking action dated December 2, 2011, at 76 FR
75464, EPA determined, pursuant to CAA section 179(c), that the entire
Parkersurg-Marietta Area is attaining the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS. This determination of attainment was based upon complete,
quality-assured and certified ambient air quality monitoring data for
the period of 2007--2009 showing that the area had attained the NAAQS
by its applicable attainment date of April 5, 2010.

B. Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and Cross State Air Pollution Rule
(CSAPR or the Transport Rule)

    On May 12, 2005, EPA published CAIR, which requires significant
reductions in emissions of SO2 and NOX from
electric generating units to limit the interstate transport of these
pollutants and the ozone and fine particulate matter they form in the
atmosphere. See 70 FR 25162. The DC Circuit initially vacated CAIR,
North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (DC Cir. 2008), but ultimately
remanded the rule to EPA without vacatur to preserve the environmental
benefits provided by CAIR. See North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176,
1178 (DC Cir. 2008). In response to the court's decision, EPA issued
the Transport Rule, also known as CSAPR, to address interstate
transport of NOX and SO2 in the eastern United
States. See 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). On August 21, 2012, the DC
Circuit issued a decision to vacate the Transport Rule. In that
decision, it also ordered EPA to continue administering CAIR ``pending
the promulgation of a valid replacement.'' EME Homer City Generation,
L.P. v. EPA, No. 11-1302 (DC Cir., August 21, 2012).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The court's judgment is not final, as of November 20, 2012,
as the mandate has not yet been issued.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of the above and as explained below, EPA proposes to
approve the redesignation request for Wood County and the Grant tax
district in Pleasants County, West Virginia, and the related
maintenance plan SIP revision for maintaining attainment of the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the West Virginia portion of the Area.
The air quality modeling analysis conducted for the Transport Rule
demonstrates that the Parkersburg-Marietta Area would be able to attain
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS even in the absence of either
CAIR or the Transport Rule. See ``Air Quality Modeling Final Rule
Technical Support Document,'' App. B, B-115 to B-134. This modeling is
available in the docket for the Transport Rule rulemaking. See FDMS
Docket ID No.

EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491. Nothing in the DC Circuit's August 21, 2012
decision disturbs or calls into question that conclusion or the
validity of the air quality analysis on which it is based.
    In addition, CAIR remains in place and enforceable until
substituted by a ``valid'' replacement rule. West Virginia's SIP
revision lists CAIR as a control measure that became State-effective on
May 1, 2008 and was approved by EPA on August 4, 2009 for the purpose
of reducing SO2 and NOX emissions. The monitoring
data used to demonstrate the Area's attainment of the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS by the April 2010 attainment deadline was also
impacted by CAIR. To the extent that the State is relying on CAIR in
its maintenance plan, the recent directive from the DC Circuit in EME
Homer City ensures that the reductions associated with CAIR will be
permanent and enforceable for the necessary time period. EPA has been
ordered by the Court to develop a new rule, and the opinion makes clear
that after promulgating that new rule EPA must provide states an
opportunity to draft and submit SIPs to implement that rule. CAIR thus
cannot be replaced until EPA has promulgated a final rule through a
notice-and-comment rulemaking process, states have had an opportunity
to draft and submit SIPs, EPA has reviewed the SIPs to determine if
they can be approved, and EPA has taken action on the SIPs, including
promulgating a FIP if appropriate. These steps alone will take many
years, even with EPA and the states acting expeditiously. The Court's
clear instruction to EPA that it must continue to administer CAIR until
a ``valid replacement'' exists provides an additional backstop; by
definition, any rule that replaces CAIR and meets the Court's direction
would require upwind states to eliminate significant downwind
contributions.
    Further, in vacating the Transport Rule and requiring EPA to
continue administering CAIR, the D.C. Circuit emphasized that the
consequences of vacating CAIR ``might be more severe now in light of
the reliance interests accumulated over the intervening four years.''
EME Homer City, slip op. at 60. The accumulated reliance interests
include the interests of states who reasonably assumed they could rely
on reductions associated with CAIR which brought certain nonattainment
areas into attainment with the NAAQS. If EPA were prevented from
relying on reductions associated with CAIR in redesignation actions,
states would be forced to impose additional, redundant reductions on
top of those achieved by CAIR. EPA believes this is precisely the type
of irrational result the court sought to avoid by ordering EPA to
continue administering CAIR. For these reasons also, EPA believes it is
appropriate to allow states to rely on CAIR, and the existing emissions
reductions achieved by CAIR, as sufficiently permanent and enforceable
pending a valid replacement rule for purposes such as redesignation.
Following promulgation of the replacement rule, EPA will review SIPs as
appropriate to identify whether there are any issues that need to be
addressed.

III. Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment

    The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA
allows for redesignation providing that:
    1. EPA determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS;
    2. EPA has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for
the area under section 110(k);
    3. EPA determines that the improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP and applicable Federal air
pollutant control regulations and other permanent and enforceable
reductions;
    4. EPA has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area as
meeting the requirements of CAA section 175A; and
    5. The state containing such area has met all requirements
applicable to the area under CAA section 110 and Part D.
    EPA has provided guidance on redesignation in the General Preamble
for the Implementation of title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990 (57 FR
13498 (April 16, 1992)) (supplemented by 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992))
and has provided further guidance on processing redesignation requests
in the following documents:
    1. ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4, 1992 (hereafter referred to as the
``Calcagni Memorandum'');
    2. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response
to Clean Air Act (CAA) Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni,
Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992; and
    3. ``Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Memorandum from Mary D.
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14,
1994.

IV. Reasons for Taking These Actions

    On March 5, 2012, the WVDEP requested redesignation of the West
Virginia portion of the Area to attainment for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 standard. As a part of the redesignation request,
WVDEP submitted a maintenance plan for the West Virginia portion of the
Area as a SIP revision, to ensure continued attainment of the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS over the next 10 years. EPA has
determined that the Parkersburg-Marietta Area has attained the 1997
annual PM2.5 standard and that West Virginia has met the
requirements set forth in CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) for redesignation of
the West Virginia portion of the Area.

V. Effect of These Proposed Actions

    Final approval of the redesignation request would change the
official designation of the West Virginia portion of the Area for the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, found at 40 CFR part 81, from
nonattainment to attainment. It would incorporate into the West
Virginia SIP a maintenance plan ensuring continued attainment of the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the Area for the next 10 years.
The maintenance plan includes, among other components, contingency
measures to remedy any future violations of the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS (should they occur). Approval of the maintenance
plan would also result in approval of the insignificance determination
for PM2.5, NOX, and SO2 for
transportation conformity purposes in the West Virginia portion of the
Area.

VI. Analysis of West Virginia's Redesignation Request

    EPA proposes to redesignate the West Virginia portion of the Area
to attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and to approve
into the West Virginia SIP the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS
maintenance plan for the West Virginia portion of the Area. These
actions are based upon EPA's determination that the Area continues to
attain the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and that all other
redesignation criteria have been met for the West Virginia portion of
the Area, provided EPA approves the base year emissions inventory that
has been proposed in a separate rulemaking action. See 77 FR 60087
(Oct. 2, 2012). The following is a description of how the WVDEP March
5, 2012 submittal satisfies the requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) of
the CAA.

1. Attainment

    As noted above, in a final rulemaking action dated December 2,
2011, at 76 FR 75464, EPA determined, pursuant to CAA section 179(c),
that the entire Parkersburg-Marietta Area is attaining the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. This determination of attainment was based upon
complete, quality-assured and certified ambient air quality monitoring
data for the period of 2007-2009 showing that the Area had attained the
NAAQS by its applicable attainment date of April 5, 2010. Further
discussion of pertinent air quality issues underlying this
determination was provided in the notice of proposed rulemaking for
EPA's determination of attainment for this Area, published on July 21,
2011 (76 FR 43634). EPA has reviewed more recent data in its Air
Quality System (AQS) database, including certified, quality-assured
data for the monitoring periods 2008-2010 and 2009-2011. This data,
shown on Table 1, shows that the Parkersburg-Marietta Area continues to
attain the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS (see the rulemaking
docket for Parkersburg-Marietta Area AQS reports). In addition, as
discussed below with respect to the maintenance plan, WVDEP has
committed to continue monitoring in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. In
summary, EPA has determined that the data submitted by West Virginia
and data taken from AQS indicate that the Parkersburg-Marietta Area has
attained and continues to attain the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS.

 Table 1--Design Value Concentrations for the Parkersburg-Marietta Area for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS ([mu]g/
                                        m\3\) for 2008-2010 and 2009-2011
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                          3-Year Annual Design Values
              County                       Monitor ID        ---------------------------------------------------
                                                                      2008-2010                 2009-2011
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wood County, WV...................                541071002                      13.1                      12.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: There are no PM2.5 monitors in the Ohio portion of the nonattainment area.

2. The Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and
Part D of the CAA and Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) of
the CAA

    EPA has determined that the West Virginia portion of the Area has
met all SIP requirements applicable for purposes of this redesignation
under section 110 of the CAA (General SIP Requirements) and that, upon
final approval of the 2002 base year inventory as discussed in section
VI, it will have met all applicable SIP requirements under Part D of
Title I of the CAA, in accordance with CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In
addition, EPA is proposing to find that all applicable requirements of
the West Virginia SIP for purposes of redesignation have been approved
in accordance with CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these
proposed determinations, EPA ascertained which SIP requirements are
applicable for purposes of redesignation of this Area and concluded
that the applicable portions of the SIP meeting these requirements are
fully approved under section 110(k) of the CAA. EPA notes that SIPs
must be fully approved only with respect to applicable requirements.
a. CAA Section 110 General SIP Requirements
    Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA delineates the general
requirements for a SIP, which include enforceable emissions limitations
and other control measures, means, or techniques, provisions for the
establishment and operation of appropriate devices necessary to collect
data on ambient air quality, and programs to enforce the limitations.
The general SIP elements and requirements set forth in section
110(a)(2) include, but are not limited to, the following:
     Submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the state
after reasonable public notice and hearing;
     Provisions for establishment and operation of appropriate
procedures needed to monitor ambient air quality;
     Implementation of a source permit program; provisions for
the implementation of Part C requirements (Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD));
     Provisions for the implementation of Part D requirements
for New Source Review (NSR) permit programs;
     Provisions for air pollution modeling; and
     Provisions for public and local agency participation in
planning and emission control rule development.
    Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA requires that SIPs contain certain
measures to prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing
to air quality problems in another state. To implement this provision
for various NAAQS, EPA has required certain states to establish
programs to address transport of air pollutants in accordance with the
NOX SIP Call (63 FR 57356 (Oct. 27, 1998)), amendments to
the NOX SIP Call (64 FR 26298 (May 14, 1999) and 65 FR 11222
(March 2, 2000)), and CAIR (70 FR 25162 (May 12, 2005)). However, the
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a state are not linked with a
particular nonattainment area's designation and classification in that
state. EPA believes that the requirements linked with a particular
nonattainment area's designation and classifications are the relevant
measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. The
transport SIP submittal requirements, where applicable, continue to
apply to a state regardless of the designation of any one particular
area in the state. Thus, EPA does not believe that these requirements
are applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation.
    In addition, EPA believes that the other CAA section 110(a)(2)
elements not connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not
linked with an area's attainment status are not applicable requirements
for purposes of redesignation. The Area will still be subject to these
requirements after it is redesignated. EPA concludes that the CAA
section 110(a)(2) and Part D requirements which are linked with a
particular area's designation and classification are the relevant
measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request, and that CAA
section 110(a)(2) elements not linked to the area's nonattainment
status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation. This approach
is consistent with EPA's existing policy on applicability of conformity
(i.e., for redesignations) and oxygenated fuels requirement. See
Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final rulemakings (61 FR 53174
(October 10, 1996)), (62 FR 24826 (May 7, 1997)); Cleveland-Akron-
Lorain, Ohio final rulemaking (61 FR 20458 (May 7, 1996)); and Tampa,
Florida, final rulemaking (60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995)). See also
the discussion on this issue in the Cincinnati redesignation (65

FR at 37890 (June 19, 2000)) and in the Pittsburgh redesignation (66 FR
at 53099 (Oct. 19, 2001)).
    EPA has reviewed the West Virginia SIP and have concluded that it
meets the general SIP requirements under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA
to the extent they are applicable for purposes of redesignation. EPA
has previously approved provisions of West Virginia's SIP addressing
section 110(a)(2) requirements, including provisions addressing
PM2.5. See 76 FR 47062 (August 4, 2011). These requirements
are, however, statewide requirements that are not linked to the
PM2.5 nonattainment status of the Parkersburg-Marietta Area.
Therefore, EPA believes that these SIP elements are not applicable
requirements for purposes of review of the State's PM2.5
redesignation request.
b. Part D Nonattainment Requirements Under the Standard
    Subpart 1 of Part D, sections 172 to 175 of the CAA, set forth the
basic nonattainment plan requirements applicable to PM2.5
nonattainment areas. Under CAA section 172, states with nonattainment
areas must submit plans providing for timely attainment and must meet a
variety of other requirements. On September 9, 2008, WVDEP submitted an
attainment plan and base year inventory for the West Virginia portion
of the Area to meet its part D requirements. On November 20, 2009, at
74 FR 60199, EPA made a determination that the Parkersburg-Marietta
Area was attaining the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Pursuant to
40 CFR 51.1004(c), upon a determination by EPA that an area designated
nonattainment for the PM2.5 NAAQS has attained the standard,
the requirement for such an area to submit an attainment demonstration
and associated reasonably available control measures (RACM), a
reasonable further progress plan (RFP), contingency measures, and other
planning SIPs related to the attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS
are suspended until the area is redesignated to attainment or EPA
determines that the area has again violated the PM2.5 NAAQS,
at which time such plans are required to be submitted. The September 9,
2008 submittal is relevant to this proposed action to redesignate the
West Virginia portion of the Area only with respect to the base year
inventory that was submitted with the attainment plan. In a separate
rulemaking action, as detailed below, EPA has proposed approval of the
base year inventory, which, upon final approval, will meet the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3), one of the criteria for
redesignation. See 77 FR 60087 (October 2, 2012).
    The General Preamble for Implementation of Title I also discusses
the evaluation of these requirements in the context of EPA's
consideration of a redesignation request. The General Preamble sets
forth EPA's view of applicable requirements for purposes of evaluating
redesignation requests when an area is attaining the standard. See
General Preamble for Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498 (April 16,
1992)).
    Because attainment has been reached for the Area, no additional
measures are needed to provide for attainment, and CAA section
172(c)(1) requirements for an attainment demonstration and RACM are no
longer considered to be applicable for purposes of redesignation as
long as the area continues to attain the standard until redesignation.
See also 40 CFR 51.1004(c). The RFP requirement under CAA section
172(c)(2) and contingency measures requirement under CAA section
172(c)(9) are similarly not relevant for purposes of redesignation.
    Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires submission of a
comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions. As
part of West Virginia's attainment plan submittal, the State submitted
a 2002 emissions inventory. On November 20, 2009 (74 FR 60199), EPA
determined that the Parkersburg-Marietta Area was attaining the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS, based on complete, quality-assured data
for the period of 2007-2009. That rulemaking action suspended certain
planning requirements related to attainment, including the RACT/RACM
requirement of section 172(c)(1), the RFP requirement of CAA section
172(c)(2), the attainment demonstration requirement of CAA section
172(c)(3), and the requirement for contingency measures in CAA section
172(c)(9). As a result of the determination of attainment, the only
remaining requirement under CAA section 172 to be considered for
purposes of redesignation of the West Virginia portion of the Area is
the emissions inventory required under CAA section 172(c)(3). On
October 2, 2012 (77 FR 60087), EPA proposed approval of the base year
inventory for the West Virginia portion of the Area for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. An evaluation of West Virginia's 2002 base year
inventory for the West Virginia portion of the Area is provided in the
Technical Support Document (TSD) prepared by EPA for that rulemaking
action. See Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-2010-0077. In that action, EPA
determined that the emissions inventory and emissions statement
requirements for the West Virginia portion of the Area have been
satisfied, and proposed to approve the inventory as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3). Final approval of the emissions
inventory in that separate rulemaking action will satisfy the emissions
inventory requirement for redesignation under CAA section 172(c)(3).
    Section 172(c)(4) of the CAA requires the identification and
quantification of allowable emissions for major new and modified
stationary sources in an area, and CAA section 172(c)(5) requires
source permits for the construction and operation of new and modified
major stationary sources anywhere in the nonattainment area. EPA has
determined that, since prevention of significant deterioration (PSD)
requirements will apply after redesignation, areas being redesignated
need not comply with the requirement that a nonattainment new source
review (NSR) program be approved prior to redesignation, provided that
the area demonstrates maintenance of the NAAQS without part D NSR. A
more detailed rationale for this view is described in a memorandum from
Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated
October 14, 1994, entitled, ``Part D New Source Review Requirements for
Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.'' Nevertheless, West
Virginia currently has an approved NSR program, codified in 45 CSR 19.
See 71 FR 64468 (November 2, 2006) (approving NSR program into the
SIP). See also 77 FR 63736 (October 17, 2012) (approving revisions to
West Virginia's PSD program). However, the State's PSD program for
annual PM2.5 will become effective in the Parkersburg-
Marietta Area upon redesignation to attainment.
    Section 172(c)(6) of the CAA requires the SIP to contain control
measures necessary to provide for attainment of the standard. Because
attainment has been reached, no additional measures are needed to
provide for attainment.
    Section 172(c)(7) of the CAA requires the SIP to meet the
applicable provisions of CAA section 110(a)(2). As noted previously,
EPA believes the West Virginia SIP meets the requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2) applicable for purposes of redesignation.
    Section 176(c) of the CAA requires states to establish criteria and
procedures to ensure that Federally supported or funded projects
conform to the air quality planning goals in the applicable SIP. The
requirement to determine conformity applies to transportation plans,
programs, and projects that are developed, funded or

approved under title 23 of the United States Code (U.S.C.) and the
Federal Transit Act (transportation conformity) as well as to all other
Federally supported or funded projects (general conformity). State
transportation conformity SIP revisions must be consistent with Federal
conformity regulations relating to consultation, enforcement and
enforceability which EPA promulgated pursuant to its authority under
the CAA.
    EPA interprets the conformity SIP requirements as not applying for
purposes of evaluating a redesignation request under CAA section 107(d)
because state conformity rules are still required after redesignation,
and Federal conformity rules apply where state rules have not been
approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F. 3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001) (upholding
this interpretation); see also 60 FR 62748 (Dec. 7, 1995) (discussing
Tampa, Florida). Thus, EPA determines that the West Virginia portion of
the Area has satisfied all applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation under CAA section 110, and, upon final approval of the
2002 base year inventory proposed on October 2, 2012, will have
satisfied all applicable requirements under part D of title I of the
CAA.
c. The West Virginia Portion of the Area Has a Fully Approved
Applicable SIP Under Section 110(k) of the CAA
    Upon final approval of the 2002 base year inventory, as proposed in
the October 2, 2012 rulemaking action, EPA will have fully approved the
West Virginia portion of the Area under section 110(k) of the CAA for
all requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation to attainment
for the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard. Therefore, upon final
approval of the 2002 base year emissions inventory, EPA will have
approved all part D title 1 requirements applicable for purposes of
this redesignation for the West Virginia portion of the Area.

3. The Air Quality Improvement in the West Virginia portion of the Area
is Due to Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions Resulting
From Implementation of the SIP and Applicable Federal Air Pollution
Control Regulations and Other Permanent and Enforceable Reductions

    For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, CAA section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii) requires EPA to determine that the air quality
improvement in the area is due to permanent and enforceable reductions
in emissions resulting from implementation of the SIP and applicable
Federal air pollution control regulations and other permanent and
enforceable reductions. EPA believes that West Virginia has
demonstrated that the observed air quality improvement in the West
Virginia portion of the Area is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the SIP,
Federal measures, and other state-adopted measures. In making this
demonstration, West Virginia has calculated the change in emissions
between 2005, one of the years used to designate the Area as
nonattainment, and 2008, one of the years for which the Area monitored
attainment, shown in Table 2.

  Table 2--Comparison of the 2005 Base Year and 2008 Attainment Year for the Parkersburg-Marietta Area, in Tons
                                                 Per Year (tpy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       2005            2008          Decrease
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2..............................  Electric Generating Units             193,253         149,152          44,101
                                    (EGUs).
                                   Non-EGUs.....................          16,056           9,724           6,332
                                   Area Sources.................             748             544             204
                                   Locomotive & Marine..........             112              75              37
                                   Onroad.......................              59              19              40
                                   Nonroad......................              73              21              52
NOX..............................  EGUs.........................          28,455          25,420           3,035
                                   Non-EGU......................           3,332           2,958             374
                                   Area Sources.................             911             587             324
                                   Locomotive & Marine..........           1,926           1,307             619
                                   Onroad.......................           5,201           4,412             789
                                   Nonroad......................             841             727             114
PM2.5............................  EGUs.........................           1,745           1,680              65
                                   Non-EGU......................             848             804              44
                                   Area Sources.................            1101             944             157
                                   Locomotive & Marine..........              64              39              25
                                   Onroad.......................             173             143              30
                                   Nonroad......................              75              66               9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The reduction in emissions and the corresponding improvement in air
quality over this time period can be attributed to a number of Federal
and other measures that the Parkersburg-Marietta Area and contributing
areas have implemented in recent years.
a. Federal Measures Implemented
    Reductions in PM2.5 precursor emissions have occurred
statewide and in upwind states as a result of Federal emission control
measures with additional emission reductions expected to occur in the
future. Federal emission control measures include the following:
(1) Tier 2 Emission Standards for Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur
Standards
    These emission control requirements result in lower NOX
and SO2 emissions from new cars and light duty trucks,
including sport-utility vehicles. The Federal rules were phased in
between 2004 and 2009. EPA has estimated that, after phasing in the new
requirements, new vehicles emit less NOX in the following
percentages: Passenger cars and light duty vehicles--77 percent; light
duty trucks, minivans, and sports utility vehicles--86 percent; and
larger sports utility vehicles, vans, and heavier trucks--69 to 95
percent. EPA expects fleet wide average emissions to decline by similar
percentages as new vehicles replace older vehicles. The Tier 2
standards also reduced the sulfur content of gasoline to 30 parts per

million (ppm) beginning in January 2006, which reflects up to a 90
percent reduction in sulfur content.
(2) Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Rule
    EPA issued this rule in July 2000. This rule includes standards
limiting the sulfur content of diesel fuel, which went into effect in
2004. A second phase took effect in 2007 which reduced PM2.5
emissions from heavy-duty highway engines and further reduced the
highway diesel fuel sulfur content to 15 ppm. The total program is
estimated to achieve a 90 percent reduction in direct PM2.5
emissions and a 95 percent reduction in NOX emissions for
these new engines using low sulfur diesel, compared to existing engines
using higher sulfur diesel fuel. The reduction in fuel sulfur content
also yielded an immediate reduction in sulfate particle emissions from
all diesel vehicles.
(3) Nonroad Diesel Rule
    In May 2004, EPA promulgated a new rule for large nonroad diesel
engines, such as those used in construction, agriculture, and mining,
to be phased in between 2008 and 2014. The rule also reduces the sulfur
content in nonroad diesel fuel by over 99 percent. Prior to 2006,
nonroad diesel fuel averaged approximately 3,400 ppm sulfur. This rule
limited nonroad diesel sulfur content to 500 ppm by 2006, with a
further reduction to 15 ppm by 2010.
b. Controls on PM2.5 Precursors
    The Parkersburg-Marietta Area's air quality is strongly affected by
regulation of SO2 and NOX from power plants. EPA
promulgated the NOX SIP Call, CAIR, and CSAPR to address
SO2 and NOX emissions from electric generating
units (EGUs) and certain non-EGUs across the eastern United States. The
affected EGUs in the West Virginia portion of the Area are the
Pleasants Power Station, Willow Island Power Station, and Pleasants
Energy. Additionally, because PM2.5 concentrations in the
Area are impacted by the transport of sulfates and nitrates, the Area's
air quality is affected by SO2 and NOX emissions
from power plants in states in the region that significantly contribute
to the Area. EPA reviewed SO2 and NOX emissions
from EGUs in states that contribute to the Area, which show that states
impacting the Area reduced SO2 and NOX emissions
from EGUs by 1,426,166 tpy and 619,601 tpy, respectively, between 2002
and 2008, continuing the generally downward trend of SO2 and
NOX emissions from these states. Information on the
reductions made by states that contribute to the Area is available at
the Air Markets Program Data (AMPD) \3\ database at http://ampd.epa.gov/ampd/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Formerly the Clean Air Markets Program (CAMD) database.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1) NOX SIP Call
    EPA issued the NOX SIP Call in 1998 pursuant to the CAA
to require 22 states and the District of Columbia to reduce
NOX emissions from large EGUs and large non-EGUs such as
industrial boilers, internal combustion engines, and cement kilns. (63
FR 57356, October 27, 1998). EPA approved West Virginia's Phase I
NOX SIP Call rule in 2002 and Phase II in 2006. Emission
reductions resulting from regulations developed in response to the
NOX SIP Call are permanent and enforceable.
(2) CAIR and CSAPR
    EPA approved West Virginia's CAIR rules in 2009 (74 FR 38536,
August 4, 2009). The maintenance plan for the West Virginia portion of
the Area thus lists CAIR as a control measure for the purpose of
reducing SO2 and NOX emissions from EGUs.
    As previously discussed, the D.C. Circuit's 2008 remand of CAIR
left the rule in place to ``temporarily preserve the environmental
values covered by CAIR'' until EPA replaced it with a rule consistent
with the court's opinion, and the court's August 2012 decision on the
Transport Rule also left CAIR in effect until the legal challenges to
the Transport Rule are resolved. As noted, EPA believes it is
appropriate to allow states to rely on CAIR, and the existing emissions
reductions achieved by CAIR, as sufficiently permanent and enforceable
pending a valid replacement rule, for purposes such as redesignation.
    Furthermore, as previously discussed, the air quality modeling
analysis conducted for the Transport Rule demonstrates that the
Parkersburg-Marietta Area would be able to attain the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS even in the absence of either CAIR or the
Transport Rule. EPA's modeling projections show that all ambient
monitors in the Area are expected to continue to maintain compliance in
the 2012 and 2014 ``no CAIR'' base cases. Therefore, none of the
ambient monitoring sites in the Parkersburg-Marietta Area are
``receptors'' that EPA projects will have future nonattainment problems
or difficulty maintaining the NAAQS. EPA finds West Virginia
appropriately included CAIR as a control measure.
(3) Controls on PM2.5 Precursors From EGUs in the Area
    First Energy's Pleasants Power Station, located in the Grant tax
district of Pleasants County has installed additional controls which
will continue to contribute to the reductions in precursor pollutants
for PM2.5. Pleasants Power Station has been equipped with
selective catalytic reduction (SCR) since 2003, and in 2007 eliminated
the 15 percent flue gas bypass to increase the efficiency of the
scrubber. It is also covered by a State consent order that requires the
operation of the SCR whenever the units are in operation, except for
periods of required SCR maintenance, beginning January 1, 2009. The
consent order is included as part of West Virginia's March 5, 2012
submittal, available in the docket for this rulemaking action at
www.regulations.gov, and will become federally enforceable upon
redesignation of this Area. In the Ohio portion of the Area, the
Muskingum River Station in Washington County, Ohio, has implemented, as
part of a federally enforceable consent decree, continuous operation of
NOX controls on unit 5 and is required to retire,
repower, or retrofit all remaining units by 2015. Also, the R.H.
Gorsuch Station in Washington County permanently shut down at the end
of 2010. Table 3 shows the reductions from EGUs in the Area between
2005 and 2008.

                Table 3--Summary of Reductions From EGUs in the Parkersburg-Marietta Area, in tpy
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                2005               2008            Reductions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
West Virginia....................  SO2.................             52,296             15,804             36,492
                                   NOX.................             16,137              8,251              4,067
                                   PM2.5...............              1,360              1,287                 73
Ohio.............................  SO2.................            140,957            133,348               7609
                                   NOX.................             16,137             17,169              -1032

                                   PM2.5...............                385                393                 -8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the information summarized above, West Virginia has
adequately demonstrated that the improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable emissions reductions. The reductions result
from Federal requirements, a Federally enforceable consent decree,
regulation of precursors under the NOX SIP Call and CAIR,
and a State consent order affecting EGUs in the Area. These reductions
are all expected to continue into the future.

4. The West Virginia Portion of the Area Has a Fully Approvable
Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 175A of the CAA

    In conjunction with its request to redesignate the West Virginia
portion of the Area to attainment status, West Virginia submitted a SIP
revision to provide for maintenance of the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS in the Area for at least 10 years after redesignation. West
Virginia is requesting that EPA approve this SIP revision as meeting
the requirement of CAA section 175A. Once approved, the maintenance
plan for the West Virginia portion of the Area will ensure that the SIP
for West Virginia meets the requirements of the CAA regarding
maintenance of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS for this Area.
a. Requirements of a Maintenance Plan
    Section 175 of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment.
Under CAA section 175A, the plan must demonstrate continued attainment
of the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after approval of a
redesignation of an area to attainment. Eight years after the
redesignation, West Virginia must submit a revised maintenance plan
demonstrating that attainment will continue to be maintained for the 10
years following the initial 10-year period. To address the possibility
of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must contain such
contingency measures, with a schedule for implementation, as EPA deems
necessary to assure prompt correction of any future PM2.5
violations. The Calcagni Memorandum dated September 4, 1992 provides
additional guidance on the content of a maintenance plan. The Calcagni
Memorandum states that a PM2.5 maintenance plan should
address the following provisions:
    (1) An attainment emissions inventory;
    (2) a maintenance demonstration showing maintenance for 10 years;
    (3) a commitment to maintain the existing monitoring network;
    (4) verification of continued attainment; and
    (5) a contingency plan to prevent or correct future violations of
the NAAQS.
b. Analysis of the Maintenance Plan
(1) Attainment Emissions Inventory
    An attainment inventory is comprised of the emissions during the
time period associated with the monitoring data showing attainment.
WVDEP determined that the appropriate attainment inventory year is
2008, one of the years in the period during which the Parkersburg-
Marietta Area monitored attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS, as described previously. The 2008 inventory contains primary
PM2.5 emissions (including condensables), SO2,
and NOX, but did not include volatile organic compounds
(VOC) or ammonia (NH3), which were insignificant. The 2008
point source inventory contained emissions for EGUs and non-EGU sources
in Wood County and the Grant tax district of Pleasants County, and
included Pleasants, Willow Island, and Pleasants Energy power plants
and the Cabot Black Carbon (Cabot) and Cytec Industries (Cytec) non-EGU
plants. West Virginia used its 2008 annual emissions inventory
submitted to EPA's National Emissions Inventory (NEI) database and
EPA's AMPD database to compile the 2008 point source inventory. For the
2008 nonpoint emissions, WVDEP used 2008 NEI version 1.5 data developed
by EPA, and for 2008 nonroad mobile sources, WVDEP used the NONROAD
model to generate emissions. The 2008 onroad mobile source inventory
was developed using the current version of Motor Vehicle Emissions
Simulator (MOVES), i.e., MOVES2010a. The Ohio Department of
Transportation (ODOT) and the Wood-Washington-Wirt Interstate Planning
Commission (WWW) performed the analysis, in coordination with the Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) and WVDEP. The analysis included
additional data provided by WVDEP and the West Virginia Department of
Transportation (WVDOT). EPA reviewed the submitted emissions inventory
and found them to be approvable.
(2) Maintenance Demonstration
    For a demonstration of maintenance, emissions inventories are
required to be projected to future dates to assess the influence of
future growth and controls; however, the demonstration need not be
based on modeling. See Wall v. EPA, supra; Sierra Club v. EPA, supra.
See also 66 FR at 53099-53100; 68 FR at 25430-32. On March 5, 2012, the
WVDEP submitted a maintenance plan for the West Virginia portion of the
Area as required by section 175A of the CAA. WVDEP uses projection
inventories to show that the Area will remain in attainment and
developed projection inventories for an interim year of 2015 and a
maintenance plan end year of 2022 to show that future emissions of
NOX, SO2, and direct PM2.5 remain at
or below the attainment year 2008 emissions levels throughout the West
Virginia portion of the Area through at least the year 2022.
(a) 2015 and 2022 Projection Emission Inventories
    For EGU emissions projections, WVDEP used EPA's Integrated Planning
Model (IPM) projections that supported CSAPR. 2015 data was taken from
these IPM runs, and 2022 projections were developed by interpolating
between the IPM runs from 2020 and 2030. The EGUs considered included
Pleasants, Willow Island, and Pleasants Energy Power Stations located
in the tax district in Pleasants County. Non-EGU point sources
(including Cytec, but not Cabot, which was shut down in 2008), area
sources, and locomotive/marine source inventories for 2015 and 2022
were projected by applying, to the 2008 inventory, the growth factors
developed from economic forecasts by Workforce West Virginia. Nonroad
source emissions for 2015 and 2022 were developed using annualized
NONROAD model. Onroad mobile emission projections for 2015 and 2022
were calculated by ODOT using MOVES2010a.
    EPA has determined that the methodologies for projecting emissions
inventories provided by WVDEP are acceptable. More detail on EPA's
analysis of the methodologies used by

West Virginia for projection inventories may be found in the TSD
related to emissions inventories available in the docket for this
rulemaking action. Tables 4 and 5 show the inventories for the 2008
attainment base year, the 2015 interim year, and the 2022 maintenance
plan end year for the West Virginia portion of the Area and the entire
nonattainment area, respectively. These tables show that projected
inventories remain below the 2008 attainment year inventory. Table 5
shows that between 2008 and 2022, the Area is projected to reduce
SO2 emissions by 111,095 tpy, NOX emissions by
22,426 tpy, and direct PM2.5 emissions by 130 tpy. Thus the
projected emissions inventories show that the Area will continue to
maintain the annual PM2.5 standard during the maintenance
period.

Table 4--Comparison of 2008, 2015, 2022 SO2, NOX, and Direct PM2.5 Emission Totals, in tpy for the West Virginia
                                               Portion of the Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             SO2 (tpy)          NOX (tpy)         PM2.5 (tpy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008...................................................             20,749             13,046              2,483
2015...................................................              9,668              7,069              2,450
2022...................................................             11,088              6,568              2,375
Decrease from 2008 to 2022.............................              9,660              6,478                107
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Table 5--Comparison of 2008, 2015, 2022 SO2, NOX, and Direct PM2.5 Emission Totals, in Tons Per Year (tpy) for
                            the Entire Parkersburg-Marietta Nonattainment Area WV-OH
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             SO2 (tpy)          NOX (tpy)         PM2.5 (tpy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008...................................................            159,535             35,412              3,686
2015...................................................             77,294             18,509              3,648
2022...................................................             48,439             12,985              3,557
Decrease from 2008 to 2022.............................            111,095             22,426                130
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Maintenance Demonstration Through 2023
    As noted in section 4.a of this notice, CAA section 175A requires a
state seeking redesignation to attainment to submit a SIP revision to
provide for the maintenance of the NAAQS in the area ``for at least 10
years after the redesignation.'' EPA has interpreted this as a showing
of maintenance ``for a period of ten years following redesignation.''
Calcagni Memorandum at p. 9. Where the emissions inventory method of
showing maintenance is used, its purpose is to show that emissions
during the maintenance period will not increase over the attainment
year inventory. Calcagni Memorandum at pp. 9-10.
    As discussed in detail above, the State's maintenance plan
submission expressly documents that the Area's emissions inventories
will remain below the attainment year inventories through at least
2022. In addition, for the reasons set forth below, EPA believes that
the State's submission, in conjunction with additional supporting
information, further demonstrates that the Area will continue to
maintain the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS at least through 2023:
     Significant emissions controls remain in place and will
continue to provide reductions that keep the Area in attainment. First
Energy's Pleasants Power Station, located in Pleasants County, is
covered by a State consent decree that requires the operation of SCR
controls on the EGU, beginning January 1, 2009.
     West Virginia has committed to maintaining all of the
control measures upon which it relies in its March 5, 2012 submittal
and will submit any changes to EPA for approval as a SIP revision.
     Emissions inventory levels for SO2 and
NOX in 2022 are well below the attainment year inventory
levels (see Table 4), and EPA believes that it is highly improbable
that sudden increases would occur that could exceed the attainment year
inventory levels in 2023.
     The mobile source contribution has been determined to be
insignificant, and is expected to remain insignificant in 2023 with
fleet turnover in upcoming years that will result in cleaner vehicles
and cleaner fuels. Further, the transportation conformity analysis of
historical trends and growth patterns indicates that this determination
should not change, out to 2030.
     Air quality concentrations, which are well below the
standard, coupled with the emissions inventory projections through
2022, demonstrate that it would be very unlikely for a violation to
occur in 2023. The 2009-2011 design value of 12.3 [mu]g/m\3\ provides a
sufficient margin in the event any emissions increase. In addition, the
2009-2011 design value shows the continued downward trend of monitored
data in this Area for the last several years.
    Thus, even if EPA finalizes its proposed approval of the
redesignation request and maintenance plans in 2013, EPA's approval is
based on a showing, in accordance with CAA section 175A, that the
State's maintenance plan provides for maintenance for at least ten
years after redesignation.
(3) Monitoring Network
    EPA has determined that West Virginia's maintenance plan includes a
commitment to continue to operate its EPA-approved monitoring network,
as necessary to demonstrate ongoing compliance with the NAAQS. West
Virginia currently operates a PM2.5 monitor in Wood County.
In its March 5, 2012 submittal, West Virginia states that it will
consult with EPA prior to making any necessary changes to the network
and will continue to quality assure the monitoring data in accordance
with the requirements of 40 CFR part 58.
(4) Verification of Continued Attainment
    To provide for tracking of the emission levels in the Area, WVDEP
requires major point sources to submit air emissions information
annually and prepares a new periodic inventory for all PM2.5
precursors every three years in accordance with EPA's Air Emissions
Reporting Requirements (AERR). WVDEP will continue to compare emissions
information to the attainment year inventory to assure continued
attainment with the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS and that WVDEP will use this information to assess emissions
trends, as necessary.
(5) The Maintenance Plan's Contingency Measures
    The contingency plan provisions for the maintenance plan are
designed to promptly correct a violation of the NAAQS that occurs after
redesignation. Section 175A of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan
include such contingency measures as EPA deems necessary to ensure that
a state will promptly correct a violation of the NAAQS that occurs
after redesignation. The maintenance plan should identify the events
that would ``trigger'' the adoption and implementation of a contingency
measure(s), the contingency measure(s) that would be adopted and
implemented, and the schedule indicating the time frame by which the
state would adopt and implement the measure(s).
    The ability of the West Virginia portion of the Area to stay in
compliance with the PM2.5 standard after redesignation
depends upon NOX and SO2 emissions in the
Parkersburg-Marietta Area remaining at or below 2008 levels. West
Virginia's maintenance plan projects NOX and SO2
emissions to decrease and stay below 2008 levels through at least the
year 2022. West Virginia's maintenance plan outlines the procedures for
the adoption and implementation of contingency measures to further
reduce emissions should a violation occur.
    West Virginia's contingency measures include a Warning Level
Response and an Action Level response. An initial Warning Level
Response is triggered when the average weighted annual mean for a
single calendar year exceeds 15.5 [mu]g/m\3\ within the maintenance
area. In that case, a study will be conducted to determine if the
emissions trends show increases; if action is necessary to reverse
emissions increases, West Virginia will follow the same procedures for
control selection and implementaiton as for an Action Level Response.
Implementation of necessary controls will take place as expeditiously
as possible, but no later than 12 months from the end of the most
recent calendar year.
    The Action Level Response will be prompted by any one of the
following: A Warning Level Response study that shows emissions
increases, a weighted annual mean over a two-year average that exceeds
the standard, or a violation of the standard in the maintenance area.
If an Action Level Response is triggered, West Virginia will adopt and
implement appropriate control measures within 18 months from the end of
the year in which monitored air quality triggering a response occurs.
West Virginia will also consider whether additional regulations that
are not a part of the maintenance plan can be implemented in a timely
manner to respond to the trigger.
    West Virginia's candidate contingency measures include the
following: (1) Diesel reduction emission strategies, (2) alternative
fuels and diesel retrofit programs for fleet vehicle operations, (3)
PM2.5, SO2, and NOX emissions offsets
for new and modified major sources, (4) concrete manufacturing
controls, and (5) additional NOX reductions. Additionally,
West Virginia has identified a list of sources that could potentially
be controlled. These include: Industrial, commercial and institutional
(ICI) boilers for SO2 and NOX controls, EGUs,
process heaters, internal combustion engines, combustion turbines,
other sources greater than 100 tons per year, fleet vehicles, and
aggregate processing plants. EPA finds that the West Virginia
maintenance plan for the Parkersburg-Marietta Area includes appropriate
contingency measures as necessary to ensure that West Virginia will
promptly correct any violation of the NAAQS that occur after
redesignation.
    For all of the reasons discussed above, EPA is proposing to approve
West Virginia's 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan for
the West Virginia portion of the Area as meeting the requirements of
CAA section 175A.

VII. Analysis of West Virginia's Transportation Conformity
Insignificance Determination for the Parkersburg-Marietta Area

    Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation projects, such
as the construction of new highways, must ``conform'' to (i.e., be
consistent with) the part of the state's air quality plan that
addresses pollution from mobile sources. ``Conformity'' to the SIP
means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality
violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of a
NAAQS or an interim milestone. This is typically determined by showing
that estimated emissions from existing and planned highway and transit
systems are less than or equal to the motor vehicle emissions budgets
(MVEBs) contained in a SIP. If a transportation plan does not
``conform,'' most new projects that would expand the capacity of
roadways cannot go forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth EPA
policy, criteria, and procedures for demonstrating and ensuring
conformity of such transportation activities to a SIP.
    When reviewing submitted ``control strategy'' SIPs or maintenance
plans containing MVEBs, EPA must affirmatively find the MVEBs contained
therein ``adequate'' for use in determining transportation conformity.
The process for determining adequacy is set forth in the guidance
``Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for the New 8-hour Ozone
and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Miscellaneous
Revisions for Existing Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule
Amendments; Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Changes.''
69 FR 40004 (July 1, 2004). After EPA affirmatively finds the submitted
MVEBs are adequate for transportation conformity purposes, in
accordance with the guidance, the MVEBs can be used by state and
Federal agencies in determining whether proposed transportation
projects ``conform'' to the SIP as required by section 176(c) of the
CAA.
    For budgets to be approvable, they must meet, at a minimum, EPA's
adequacy criteria in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). However, the transportation
conformity rule at 40 CFR 93.109(f) allows areas to forego
establishment of MVEBs where it is demonstrated that the regional motor
vehicle emissions for a particular pollutant or precursor are an
insignificant contributor to the air quality problem in an area. EPA's
rationale for providing for insignificance determinations may be found
in the July 1, 2004 revision to the Transportation Conformity Rule. The
general criteria for insignificance determinations, per 40 CFR
93.109(f), are based on a number of factors, including the percentage
of motor vehicle emissions in the context of the total SIP inventory;
the current state of air quality as determined by monitoring data for
the relevant NAAQS; the absence of SIP motor vehicle control measures;
and the historical trends and future projections of the growth of motor
vehicle emissions in the area.
    In West Virginia's March 5, 2012 submittal, the State provided
information that projects that onroad mobile source NOX
emissions constitute 12 percent or less of the Area's total
NOX emissions in 2015 and 2022 due to continuing fleet
turnover and that onroad mobile source PM2.5 emissions
constitute less than 2.1 percent of the Area's total PM2.5
emissions. Both projections took into consideration future vehicle
miles traveled (VMT) growth. In addition, neither EPA nor the State has
made any findings that VOCs, SO2, or NH3 are
significant contributors to PM2.5 mobile emissions. While
the

level of NOX is higher than the 10 percent benchmark, WVDEP
has provided additional information that supports its insignificance
determination for NOX. For more detail on EPA's analysis of
West Virginia's insignificance determination, see the Transportation
Conformity TSD in the docket for today's rulemaking. Therefore, the
March 5, 2012 submittal meets the criteria in the relevant portions of
40 CFR 93.102 and 93.118 for an insignificance finding, and EPA agrees
with the determination of insignificance for both NOX and
PM2.5 for the West Virginia portion of the Area. As
previously discussed, EPA initiated a comment period on November 5,
2012 on the proposed insignificance determination for the West Virginia
portion of the Area on the OTAQ Web site to allow for a 30-day review
of this proposed insignificance determination in conjunction with this
proposed rulemaking. EPA is proposing to find that West Virginia's
insignificance determination for transportation conformity is adequate.
For more information on EPA's insignificance findings, see the TSD
dated August 3, 2012, available in the docket for this rulemaking at
www.regulations.gov.

VIII. Proposed Actions

    EPA is proposing to approve the redesignation of the West Virginia
portion of the Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA has evaluated West Virginia's
redesignation request and determined that upon approval of the base
year emissions inventory in the separate rulemaking action noted
previously, it would meet the redesignation criteria set forth in
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA believes that the monitoring data
demonstrate that the Parkersburg-Marietta Area attains the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS and will continue to attain the standard. Final
approval of this redesignation request would change the designation of
the West Virginia portion of the Area from nonattainment to attainment
for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to
approve the associated maintenance plan for the West Virginia portion
of the Area, submitted on March 5, 2012, as a revision to the West
Virginia SIP because it meets the requirements of CAA section 175A as
described previously in this notice. EPA is also proposing to approve
the insignificance determination for on-road motor vehicle contribution
of PM2.5, NOX, and SO2 submitted by
WVDEP for the West Virginia portion of the Area in conjunction with its
redesignation request. As noted previously, the 30-day public comment
period for the proposed insignificance determination started on
November 5, 2012 and will end on December 5, 2012. EPA is soliciting
public comments on the issues discussed in this document. These
comments will be considered before taking final action.

IX. 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
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 Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule proposing approval of West Virginia's
redesignation request, maintenance plan, and transportation conformity
insignificance determination for the Parkersburg-Marietta Area for the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen oxides, PM2.5, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

40 CFR Part 81

    Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness Areas.

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

    Dated: November 27, 2012.
W. C. Early,
Acting, Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2012-29865 Filed 12-10-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: January 13, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 8)]
[Notices]
[Page 1672-1674]
[DOCID:fr13ja09-37]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings 1

December 29, 2008.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC09-33-000.
    Applicants: Willow Creek Hydro LLC; Sheldon Energy LLC.
    Description: Willow Creek Energy LLC and Sheldon Energy LLC submits
an application for authorization of transactions that will result in an
upstream change in ownership.
    Filed Date: 12/19/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081223-0252.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 09, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: EC09-34-000.
    Applicants: SOWEGA Power LLC.
    Description: SOWEGA Power LLC submits an application for
authorization under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act for
disposition of jurisdictional facilities and request for expedited
action.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081224-0092.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009.
    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER96-2734-007.
    Applicants: Southern Indiana Gas & Electric Company.
    Description: Southern Indiana Gas and Electric Company et al.
request renewal of its market-based rate authority.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081224-0103.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER98-411-001.
    Applicants: Wolverine Power Supply Cooperative, Inc.
    Description: Market Power Update of Wolverine Power Supply
Cooperative, Inc.
    Filed Date: 12/23/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081223-5088.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, January 13, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER00-3614-010; ER01-1300-009.
    Applicants: BP Energy Company; Whiting Clean Energy, Inc.
    Description: BP Energy Company submits FERC revised pages of their
market-based rate wholesale power sales tariff to conform them with
FERC's standard tariff language governing the sale of ancillary
services in the markets administered by MISO.
    Filed Date: 12/19/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081223-0247.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 09, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER00-3751-007; ER08-1236-003;
    Applicants: ANP FUNDING I, LLC; IPA Trading, LLC;
    Description: IPA Entities submits an application for funding of
Category 1 seller status in the Southeast, SPP, Southwest and Northwest
Regions.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081224-0102.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER01-205-032; ER98-2640-030; ER98-4590-027; ER99-
1610-035.
    Applicants: Xcel Energy Services Inc.; Northern States Power
Company; Public Service Company of Colorado; Southwestern Public
Service Company.
    Description: Xcel Energy Operating Companies submits Attachment A
an Updated Appendix.
    Filed Date: 12/19/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081223-0246.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 09, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER03-345-012.
    Applicants: New England Power Pool Participants Comm.
    Description: ISO New England submits semi-annual report on Load
Response Programs.
    Filed Date: 12/19/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081223-0236.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 09, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER06-758-006; ER06-759-005.
    Applicants: Selkirk Cogen Partners, L.P.; Chambers Cogeneration,
Limited Partnership.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of Chambers
Cogeneration Limited Partnership et al.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081222-5169.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-476-003.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc.
    Description: ISO New England Inc et al. submits transmittal letter
and proposed amendments to the ISO Tariff in compliance with the
Commission's 10/16/08 order in the proceeding.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081224-0099.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER07-521-007.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, In.
    Description: New York Independent System Operator, Inc submits
compliance filing.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081224-0100.
    Comment Date: 5.p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-100-007; ER07-1215-007; ER07-265-008.
    Applicants: Sempra Energy Trading, LLC, Sempra Energy Solutions
LLC, The Royal Bank of Scotland plc.
    Description: Sempra Energy Trading LLC et al. submits a notice of
non-material change in status.
    Filed Date: 12/19/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081223-0231.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 09, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-209-001.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System.
    Description: Midwest Independent System Operator, Inc submits a
revised unexecuted Large Generator Interconnection Agreement among
itself, Prairie State Generating Company, LLC et al. as acting agent
for Illinois Power Company et al.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081224-0091.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-394-018.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc
reports that they make the compliance filing to comply with the
Commission's 60-day compliance directives in the Rehearing Order.
    Filed Date: 12/19/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081223-0239.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 09, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER08-1328-001.
    Applicants: New England Participating Transmission.
    Description: New England Participating Transmission Owners

submits supporting materials to supplement its 7/31/08 informational
filing.
    Filed Date: 12/19/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081223-0240.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 09, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-339-001.
    Applicants: Crystal Lake Wind, LLC.
    Description: Crystal Lake Wind, LLC submits amended and restated
service agreement.
    Filed Date: 12/19/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081223-0237.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 09, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-393-001.
    Applicants: West Oaks Energy, LLC.
    Description: West Oaks Energy, LLC submits a revised application
for Market-Based Rate Authority, filed on 12/10/08.
    Filed Date: 12/23/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081229-0115.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, January 13, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-432-000.
    Applicants: Chinook Power Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Chinook Power Transmission, LLC submits an application
for authority to sell transmission rights at negotiated rates.
    Filed Date: 12/19/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081223-0163.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 09, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-433-000.
    Applicants: Zephyr Power Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Zephyr Power Transmission, LLC submits an application
for authority to sell transmission rights at negotiated rates.
    Filed Date: 12/19/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081223-0162.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 09, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-434-000.
    Applicants: Pittsfield Generating Company, L.P.
    Description: Pittsfield Generating Co, LP submits its proposed
revisions to its cost of service Reliability Must-Run Agreement.
    Filed Date: 12/19/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081223-0161.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 09, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-435-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Services, Inc.
    Description: Entergy Operating Companies submits an executed Second
Revised Network Integration Transmission Service Agreement etc.
    Filed Date: 12/19/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081223-0160.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 09, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-436-000.
    Applicants: Southern California Edison Company.
    Description: Southern California Edison submits a Small Generator
Interconnection Agreement.
    Filed Date: 12/19/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081223-0159.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 09, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-437-000.
    Applicants: New York State Reliability Council, L.L.
    Description: New York State Reliability Council, L.L.C.'s revised
Installed Capacity Requirement for the New York Control Area.
    Filed Date: 12/19/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081219-5156.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 09, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-439-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool submits a partially executed
Service Agreement for Network Integration Transmission Service etc.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081223-0233.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-441-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool submits an executed Service
Agreement for Network Integration Transmission Service etc.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081223-0234.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-442-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc submits an executed Large
Generator Interconnection Agreement between SPP as Transmission
Provider, et al. as Interconnection Customer.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081229-0117.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009

    Docket Numbers: ER09-443-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc request for Waiver of Tariff
Provision and Expedited Treatment.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081229-0118.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-444-000.
    Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
    Description: Southwest Power Pool, Inc submits revisions to its
Open Access Transmission tariff in order to adopt changes to its Credit
Policy.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081229-0116.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-445-000.
    Applicants: Southern Company Services, Inc.
    Description: Alabama Power Company et al. submits the transmittal
letter and the Interconnection Agreement between Live Oaks Company, LLC
and Southern Companies.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081224-0098.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-447-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, LLC.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, LLC submits notice of the
cancellation of an interconnection service agreement between PJM and
Susquehanna Electric Company designated as Original Service Agreement
798.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081224-0097.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-448-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Services, Inc.
    Description: Entergy Services, Inc submits transmittal letter and a
mutually-executed Dynamic Transfer Operating Agreement etc.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081224-0096.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-449-000.
    Applicants: Entergy Services, Inc.
    Description: Entergy Services, LP submits transmittal letter with
Attachments A & B.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081224-0095.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-450-000.
    Applicants: Kansas City Power & Light Company.
    Description: Kansas City Power & Light submits amended Service
Schedule A-EID and new Service Schedule C-EID, both of which are to be
service schedules under KCP&L provides electric interconnection and
delivery services to KEPCO etc.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081224-0094.

    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-453-000.
    Applicants: Deseret Generation & Trans Co-Oper., Inc.
    Description: Deseret Generation & Transmission Co-operative, Inc
submits an amendment to its service agreement for wholesale
requirements service to one of its members, Dixie-Escalante Rural
Electric Association, Inc.
    Filed Date: 12/23/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081229-0114.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, January 13, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-454-000.
    Applicants: ISO New England Inc. & New England Power.
    Description: ISO New England Inc et al. submits amendments to the
ISO Financial Assurance Policy for Market Participants that is Exhibit
1A to Section I of the ISO Tariff and to the ISO Billing Policy that is
Exhibit 1D to Section I of the ISO Tariff etc.
    Filed Date: 12/23/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081229-0113.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, January 13, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-456-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: PJM Interconnection, LLC submits notice of the
cancellation of an interim interconnection service agreement between
PJM and American Electric Power Service Corporation as agent for the
operating companies of the AEPSC etc.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081229-0112.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-457-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent System Transmission.
    Description: Midwest Independent System Operator, Inc submit
proposed revisions to its Open Access Transmission, Energy and
Operating Reserve Markets Tariff.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081229-0111.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-459-000.
    Applicants: American Transmission Systems, Incorporated.
    Description: American Transmission System, Incorporated submits
Wholesale Distribution Service Agreement between ATSI as agent for
Pennsylvania Power Company and the Borough if Wampum, PA.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081229-0108.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-460-000.
    Applicants: Arizona Public Service Company.
    Description: Arizona Public Service Company submits proposed
revisions to APS's FERC Electric Tariff, Volume 3 APS's Market Rate
Tariff.
    Filed Date: 12/22/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081229-0109.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 12, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-466-000.
    Applicants: New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
    Description: New York Independent System Operator, Inc submits
tariff revisions to its Market Administration and Control Area Services
Tariff and its Open Access Transmission Tariff etc.
    Filed Date: 12/23/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081229-0102.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, January 13, 2009.

    Docket Numbers: ER09-469-000.
    Applicants: Midwest Independent Transmission System.
    Description: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc
et al. submit revisions to their Joint Operating Agreement and
Congestion Management Process as part of the RTOs' 2008 initiative to
update their JOA.
    Filed Date: 12/19/2008.
    Accession Number: 20081229-0099.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 09, 2009.

    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in
determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to
make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://
www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-398 Filed 1-12-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P