Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES

12268

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 40 / Wednesday, March 3, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
not require that maintenance plans identify or provide funding for any costs associated with implementation of the plan. EPA has set forth in the NPRM the criteria relevant to approvability of the LMP. EPA has determined that the December 10, 2019 SIP revision includes adequate information to support approval of West Virginias LMP. As set forth in the NPRM, EPA has determined that the State provided sufficient assurances in the LMP for EPA to approve West Virginias 1997 8hour ozone second maintenance plan for the Huntington Area. EPAs evaluation of the West Virginias December 10, 2019 SIP revision and the rationale for taking rulemaking action on this submission was discussed in detail in the NPRM. This comment gives EPA no reason to believe that the criteria it applied in the NPRM are either incorrect, incomplete or have been misapplied.
Comment 2: Two commenters assert that the LMP should not be approved because of EPAs reliance on the Air Quality Modeling TSD that was developed for EPAs regional transport rulemaking.
One of the commenters alleged that the TSD does not consider newer EPA
policies i.e., repealing the MATS rule or removing Californias ability to regulate cars, or even the repeal of the Clean Power Plan and replacement with the ACE rule.
Both commenters contend that: 1
The TSD shows maintenance of the area for three years and not 10 years; 2 the modeling was performed for transport purposes across state lines and not to show maintenance of the NAAQS; 3
the modeling was performed for the 2008 and 2015 ozone NAAQS and not the 1997 ozone NAAQS; and 4 the TSD has been highly contested by environmental groups, incorrectly uses assumptions disputed by multiple nongovernmental and governmental organizations and other states contend EPAs modeling as flawed.
Further, one commenter contends that the TSD does not address a recent court decision that threw out EPAs modeling because it modeled to the wrong attainment year. . . . Both commenters assert that the TSD is not being used for its intended purpose and EPA should disapprove the LMP due to EPAs reliance on the TSD in the NPRM.
Response 2: EPA does not agree with the commenters that approval of West Virginias second maintenance plan is not appropriate. The commenters raise concerns about West Virginia and EPAs citation of the Air Quality Modeling TSD, but the commenters ignore that EPAs primary basis for finding that
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:13 Mar 02, 2021

Jkt 253001

West Virginia has provided for maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Huntington Area is the States demonstration that the criteria for a LMP has been met. See 85 FR
38825, June 29, 2020. Specifically, as stated in the NPRM, for decades EPA
has interpreted the provision in CAA
section 175A that requires states to provide for maintenance of the NAAQS to be satisfied where areas demonstrate that design values are and have been stable and well below the NAAQSe.g., at 85% of the standard, or in this case at or below 0.071 ppm.
EPA calls such demonstration a limited maintenance plan. The Air Quality Modeling TSD referenced by West Virginia merely provides additional support for the areas continued maintenance of the 1997 8hour ozone NAAQS.
EPA disagrees that it must disapprove the LMP because the Air Quality Modeling TSD does not consider newer EPA policies like repealing the MATS
Mercury and Air Toxics Standards rule, or Californias ability to regulate cars, or even the repeal of the Clean Power Plan and replacement with the ACE Affordable Clean Energy rule.
First, MATS was not repealed. All emission reductions required under MATS remain. See 85 FR 31286, 31312
May 22, 2020. Second, the 2023 Air Quality Modeling TSD cited by West Virginia in their second maintenance plan submission does not include emission reductions associated with the Clean Power Plan.8 EPAs actions with respect to regulating automobile emissions in California are not relevant to this action.
The modeling cited by the commenters was referenced in West Virginias submission and as part of EPAs proposed approval as supplementary supporting information, and we do not agree that the commenters concerns about relying on that modeling are warranted. The commenters contend that the modeling only goes out three years to 2023 and it needs to go out to 10 years, and therefore may not be relied upon.
8 See Technical Support Document TSD, Additional Updates to Emissions Inventories for the Version 6.3, 2011 Emissions Modeling Platform for the Year 2023, available at https www.epa.gov/
sites/production/files/2017-11/documents/
2011v6.3_2023en_update_emismod_tsd_
oct2017.pdf, at 92 The projected EGU emissions for 2023el included the Final Mercury and Air Toxics MATS rule announced on December 21, 2011, the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule CSAPR
issued July 6, 2011, the CSAPR Update Rule issued October 26, 2016 and the Clean Power Plan CPP, while the 2023en emissions i.e., the emissions inventory used in the updated 2023 modeling include the other rules but do not include the CPP.

PO 00000

Frm 00012

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

However, the Air Quality Modeling TSD
was only relied upon by EPA to provide additional support to indicate that the area is expected to continue to attain the NAAQS during the relevant period. As noted above, West Virginia primarily met the requirement to demonstrate maintenance of the NAAQS by showing that they met the criteria for an LMP, rather than by modeling or projecting emissions inventories out to a future year. We also do not agree that the State is required to demonstrate maintenance for 10 years; CAA section 175A requires the State to demonstrate maintenance through the 20th year after the area is redesignated, which in this case is 2026.
We also disagree with the commenters contention that because the Air Quality Modeling TSD was performed to analyze the transport of pollution across state lines with respect to other ozone NAAQS, it cannot be relied upon in this action. We acknowledge that the Air Quality Modeling TSD at issue was performed as part of EPAs efforts to address interstate transport pollution under CAA section 110a2DiI. However, the purpose of the Air Quality Modeling TSD is fully in keeping with the question of whether the Huntington Area is expected to maintain the NAAQS. The Air Quality Modeling TSD
projected ozone concentrations at every air quality monitor in the contiguous United States in 2023 in order to identify which monitors might have problems attaining or maintaining the 2008 and 2015 NAAQS for ozone in 2023. Because the Air Quality Modeling TSD results simply provide projected ozone concentration design values, which are expressed as three-year averages of the annual fourth high 8hour daily maximum ozone concentrations, the modeling results are useful for analyzing attainment and maintenance of any of the ozone NAAQS that are measured using this averaging time; in this case, the 1997, 2008 and 2015 ozone NAAQS. The only difference between the three standards is stringency. Taking the Huntington Areas most recent certified design value as part of the proposal i.e., for the years 20162018, the areas design value was 0.064 ppm. What we can discern from this is that the area is meeting the 1997
ozone NAAQS of 0.080 ppm, the 2008
ozone NAAQS of 0.075 ppm, and the 2015 ozone NAAQS of 0.070 ppm. The same principle applies to projected design values from the Air Quality Modeling TSD. In this case, the interstate transport modeling indicated that in 2023, the Huntington Areas design value is projected to be 0.058

E:FRFM03MRR1.SGM

03MRR1