Quiero saber acerca de...

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 31 / Thursday, February 18, 2021 / Rules and Regulations Virginias obligation to submit a second maintenance plan and addresses each of the five necessary elements.
As discussed in the June 29, 2020
NPRM, consistent with longstanding EPA guidance,3 areas that meet certain criteria may be eligible to submit a limited maintenance plan LMP to satisfy one of the requirements of CAA
section 175A. Specifically, states may meet CAA section 175As requirements to provide for maintenance by demonstrating that the areas design value 4 is well below the NAAQS and that it has had historical stability attaining the NAAQS. EPA evaluated WVDEPs December 10, 2019 submittal for consistency with all applicable EPA
guidance and CAA requirements. EPA
found that the submittal met CAA
section 175A and all CAA requirements, and proposed approval of the LMP for the Weirton Area, comprising Brooke and Hancock Counties, as a revision to the West Virginia SIP. The effect of this action makes certain commitments related to the maintenance of the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS federally enforceable as part of the West Virginia SIP.
Other specific requirements of WVDEPs December 10, 2019 submittal and the rationale for EPAs proposed action are explained in the NPRM and will not be restated here.
III. EPAs Response to Comments Received EPA received five sets of relevant comments on the June 29, 2020 NPRM, two of which were exact duplicates. All comments received are in the docket for this rulemaking action. A summary of the comments and EPAs responses are provided herein.
Comment 1
The commenter requests that EPA
disapprove West Virginias LMP
because it fails to show maintenance of the standard for 10 years and it fails to provide for the protection of health because of the lack of enforcement and also because of a lack of reductions in the Steubenville area. The commenter
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES

3 See
Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable Ozone Nonattainment Areas from Sally L. Shaver, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards OAQPS, dated November 16, 1994;
Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment Areas from Joseph Paisie, OAQPS, dated October 6, 1995; and Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Moderate PM10 Nonattainment Areas from Lydia Wegman, OAQPS, dated August 9, 2001.
4 The ozone design value for a monitoring site is the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations.
The design value for an ozone nonattainment area is the highest design value of any monitoring site in the area.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:05 Feb 17, 2021

Jkt 253001

also requests that EPA disapprove the LMP because EPA has not provided information with regards to all of the areas the agency proposes to monitor.
Response 1
EPA disagrees that the LMP should be disapproved based on the reasons given by the commenter. EPA has determined that the LMP adequately demonstrates compliance for the second 10 year period in accordance with CAA section 175A and EPAs longstanding guidance that establishes the five elements that EPA has determined will ensure maintenance of the relevant NAAQS for a period of 10 years: 1 An attainment emissions inventory; 2 maintenance demonstration; 3 a commitment for continued air quality monitoring; 4 a process for verification of continue attainment; and 5 a contingency plan.5
EPA determined that West Virginias second maintenance plan addresses all the required elements of an approvable maintenance plan. Although the commenter asserts that the LMP fails to demonstrate maintenance of the NAAQS, the commenter does not offer any data to contradict the data that EPA
and West Virginia relied upon, nor does the commenter explain why the data that EPA and West Virginia relied upon does not adequately demonstrate maintenance of the NAAQS. See, e.g., International Fabricare Institute v.
E.P.A. 6 The Administrative Procedures Act does not require that EPA change its decision based on comments consisting of little more than assertions that in the opinions of the commenters the agency got it wrong, when submitted with no accompanying data.
Because this LMP demonstrates that the Steubenville-Weirton Area is maintaining the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and will maintain it for the duration of this LMP based on its historic and current level of emissions, there is no indication that the Weirton Area suffers from a lack of reductions.
The Area is required to obtain additional emissions reductions from the contingency measures included in its plan, but those measures will only be required to be implemented if triggered by events indicating that the Areas ability to maintain the NAAQS is threatened. EPAs approval of this LMP
under the authority of CAA 110 confers upon EPA the authority to enforce the provisions of this plan, if necessary, in Federal court. Therefore, EPA disagrees 5 Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment, Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, September 4, 1992 Calcagni Memo.
6 972 F.2d 384 D.C. Cir. 1992.

PO 00000

Frm 00009

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

10019

with the commenter that this LMP does not demonstrate maintenance of the NAAQS and is not enforceable.
EPA also disagrees that the LMP
should be disapproved because EPA has not provided information regarding all of the areas the agency proposes to monitor. West Virginia currently has an EPA approved monitoring network to measure compliance with the 8-hour ozone NAAQS 49 FR 18094, effective June 26, 1984. West Virginia is required to have this monitoring network for at least the duration of the second maintenance plan 7 and cannot change it without EPAs approval, see 40 CFR
58.14a. The monitors are currently located in Hancock County, West Virginia and in Jefferson County, Ohio.8
If the monitoring locations need to change, EPA will approve those changes only if the new locations will continue to monitor compliance with the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the Weirton Area, see 40 CFR 58.10a. This information was available to the public through EPAs prior rulemakings cited previously in this document, and therefore there is no lack of information for the public regarding all of the areas the agency proposes to monitor regarding the Weirton Area. The commenter therefore provides no basis for EPA to change its approval of the LMP for the Weirton Area.
Comment 2
The commenter claims that the LMP
does not address the critical public health threats posed by high levels of toxic air pollution in the Weirton Area.
The commenter alleges that the LMP
should not be approved based on a letter that the commenter states was submitted by the American Lung Association ALA to Ohio EPA, in which the ALA identified the Steubenville Plan to be shortsighted, and could endanger the health and safety of thousands of residents in the nonattainment area. Further, the commenter also contends that the LMP
was approved without an Environmental Effects Statement and an 7 See Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable Ozone Nonattainment Areas from Sally L. Shaver, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards OAQPS, dated November 16, 1994;
Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment Areas from Joseph Paisie, OAQPS, dated October 6, 1995; and Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Moderate PM10 Nonattainment Areas from Lydia Wegman, OAQPS, dated August 9, 2001.
8 See 71 FR 57905 October 2, 2006 and the following documents included in this rules docket:
West Virginias 2020 Ambient Air Monitoring Annual Network Plan and SO2 Data Requirement Rule Annual Report and Appendix D of Ohio EPAs 20202021 Ohio EPA Air Monitoring Network Plan.

E:FRFM18FER1.SGM

18FER1