[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 212 (Wednesday, November 3, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 59644-59648]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-28386]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR PART 52
[OH 129-1a; FRL-6464-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Maintenance Plan Revisions; Ohio
AGENCY: United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: USEPA is approving an August 19, 1999, request from Ohio for a
State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision of the Columbiana County ozone
maintenance plan. The maintenance plan revision establishes a new
transportation conformity mobile source emissions budget for the year
2005. USEPA is approving the allocation of a portion of the safety
margin for oxides of nitrogen (NOX) to the area's 2005
mobile source emissions budget for transportation conformity purposes.
This allocation will still maintain the total emissions for the area at
or below the attainment level required by the transportation conformity
regulations. The transportation conformity budget for volatile organic
compounds will remain the same as previously approved in the
maintenance plan.
DATES: This rule is effective on January 3, 2000, unless USEPA receives
adverse written comments by December 3, 1999. If adverse comment is
received, USEPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the rule in the
Federal Register and inform the public that the rule will not take
effect.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief,
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch, (AR-18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
[[Page 59645]]
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois, 60604.
You may inspect copies of the documents relevant to this action
during normal business hours at the following location:
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch, (AR-18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois, 60604.
Please contact Patricia Morris at (312) 353-8656 before visiting
the Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Morris, Environmental
Scientist, Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-8656.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we'',
``us'', or ``our'' are used we mean USEPA.
This Supplementary Information section is organized as follows:
What action is USEPA taking today?
Who is affected by this action?
How did the State support its request?
What is transportation conformity?
What is an emissions budget?
What is a safety margin?
How does this action change the Columbiana County ozone maintenance
plan?
Why is the request approvable?
USEPA Action.
Administrative Requirements.
What Action is USEPA Taking Today?
In this action, we are approving a revision to the ozone
maintenance plan for Columbiana County, Ohio. The revision will change
the mobile source emissions budget for NOX that is used for
transportation conformity purposes. The revision will keep the total
emissions for the area at or below the attainment level required by
law. This action will allow State or local agencies to maintain air
quality while providing for transportation growth.
Who Is Affected by This Action?
Primarily, the transportation sector represented by Ohio Department
of Transportation and persons needing to travel through Columbiana
County will be affected by this revision. A proposed project to build a
new 4 lane highway through a portion of Columbiana County would produce
higher emissions than currently allowed in the maintenance plan. The
conformity rule, however, provides that if a ``safety margin'' exists
in the maintenance plan, then the safety margin can be allocated to the
transportation sector via the mobile source budget.
How Did the State Support This Request?
On August 19, 1999, Ohio submitted to USEPA a SIP revision request
for the Columbiana County ozone maintenance area. A public hearing on
this proposal was held on September 22, 1999. No one from the public
commented on the proposed revisions. At the public hearing Ohio
officially changed the request from 1 ton per day of NOX to
0.5 ton per day of NOX to be allocated to the mobile source
budget.
In the submittal, Ohio requested to establish a new 2005 mobile
source emissions budget for NOX for the Columbiana County,
Ohio, ozone maintenance area. The State originally requested that 1 ton
per day of NOX be allocated from the maintenance plan's
safety margin. After comment from USEPA, however, the request was
changed to 0.5 ton per day of NOX. The 0.5 ton per day
change will accommodate the proposed highway and leave a safety margin
for future use. The mobile source budgets are used for transportation
conformity purposes.
What Is Transportation Conformity?
Transportation conformity means that the level of emissions from
the transportation sector (cars, trucks and buses) must be consistent
with the requirements in the SIP to attain and maintain the air quality
standards. The Clean Air Act, in section 176(c), requires conformity of
transportation plans, programs and projects to an implementation plan's
purpose of attaining and maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. On November 24, 1993, USEPA published a final rule
establishing criteria and procedures for determining if transportation
plans, programs and projects funded or approved under Title 23 U.S.C.
or the Federal Transit Act conform to the SIP.
The transportation conformity rules require an ozone maintenance
area, such as Columbiana County, to compare the actual projected
emissions from cars, trucks and buses on the highway network, to the
mobile source emissions budget established by a maintenance plan. The
Columbiana County area has an approved ozone maintenance plan. Our
approval of the maintenance plan established the mobile source
emissions budgets for transportation conformity purposes.
What Is an Emissions Budget?
An emissions budget is the projected level of controlled emissions
from the transportation sector (mobile sources) that is estimated in
the SIP. The SIP controls emissions through regulations, for example,
on fuels and exhaust levels for cars. The emissions budget concept is
further explained in the preamble to the November 24, 1993,
transportation conformity rule (58 FR 62188). The preamble also
describes how to establish the mobile source emissions budget in the
SIP and how to revise the emissions budget. The transportation
conformity rule allows the mobile source emissions budget to be changed
as long as the total level of emissions from all sources remains below
the attainment level.
What Is a Safety Margin?
A ``safety margin'' is the difference between the attainment level
of emissions (from all sources) and the projected level of emissions
(from all sources) in the maintenance plan. The attainment level of
emissions is the level of emissions during one of the years in which
the area met the air quality health standard. For example: Columbiana
County was monitoring attainment of the one hour ozone standard during
the 1988-1990 time period. The State uses 1990 as the attainment level
of emissions for Columbiana County. The emissions from County point,
area and mobile sources in 1990 equaled 23.98 tons per day of VOC and
11.66 tons per day of NOX. The Ohio Environmental Protection
Agency projected emissions out to the year 2005 and projected a total
of 18.70 tons per day of VOC and 10.02 tons per day of NOX
from all sources in Columbiana County. The safety margin for the County
is calculated to be the difference between these amounts or 5.28 tons
per day of VOC and 1.64 tons per day of NOX. Table 1 gives
detailed information on the estimated emissions from each source
category and the safety margin calculation.
The 2005 emission projections reflect the point, area and mobile
source reductions and are illustrated in Table 1.
Table 1.--NOX and VOC Emissions Budget; and Safety Margin
Determinations, Columbiana County
[Tons/day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source Category 1990 2005
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC Emission
Point............................................... 1.89 2.25
Mobile.............................................. 11.69 5.65
Area................................................ 10.40 10.80
-------------------
Totals............................................ 23.98 18.70
[[Page 59646]]
Safety Margin = 1990 total emissions--2005 total emissions = 5.28 tons/
day VOC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX Emissions
Point............................................... 0.06 0.07
Mobile.............................................. 7.00 5.05
Area................................................ 4.60 4.90
-------------------
Totals............................................ 11.66 10.02
Safety Margin = 1990 total emissions--2005 total emissions = 1.64 tons/
day NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The emissions are projected to maintain the area's air quality
consistent with the air quality health standard. The safety margin
credit can be allocated to the transportation sector. The total
emission level, even with this allocation will be below the attainment
level or safety level and thus is acceptable. The safety margin is the
extra safety [points] that can be allocated as long as the total level
is maintained.
How Does This Action Change the Columbiana County Zone Maintenance
Plan?
It raises the NOX emissions budget for mobile sources.
The maintenance plan is designed to provide for future growth while
still maintaining the ozone air quality standard. Growth in industries,
population, and traffic is offset with reductions from cleaner cars and
other emission reduction programs. Through the maintenance plan the
State and local agencies can manage and maintain air quality while
providing for growth.
In the submittal, Ohio requested to allocate part of the area's
safety margin to the mobile source emissions budget. The Columbiana
County area's safety margin is the difference between the 1990
attainment inventory year and the 2005 projected emissions inventory
(5.28 tons /day VOC safety margin, and 1.64 tons/day NOX
safety margin) as shown in Table 1. The SIP revision requests the
allocation of 0.5 ton/day NOX, into the area's mobile source
NOX emissions budget from the safety margin. The 2005 mobile
source NOX emissions budget showing the safety margin
allocations are outlined in Table 2. The mobile source NOX
emissions budget in Table 2 will be used for transportation conformity
purposes.
Table 2 below illustrates that the requested portion of the safety
margin can be allocated to the 2005 mobile source budget and that total
emissions will still remain at or below the 1990 attainment level of
total emissions for the Columbiana County maintenance area. Since the
area would still be at or below the 1990 attainment level for the total
emissions, this allocation is allowed by the conformity rule. The VOC
budget and safety margin will remain the same.
Table 2.--Allocation of Safety Margin to the 2005 Mobile Source
Emissions Budget, Columbiana County
[Tons/day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source category 1990 2005
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX Emissions
Point............................................... 0.06 0.07
Mobile.............................................. 7.00 5.55
Area................................................ 4.60 4.90
-------------------
Total............................................. 11.66 10.52
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remaining Safety Margin = 1990 total emissions -2005 total
emissions = 1.14 tons/day NOX
Why is the Request Approvable?
After review of the SIP revision request, USEPA finds that the
requested allocation of the safety margin for the Columbiana County
area is approvable because the new mobile source emissions budget for
NOX maintains the total emissions for the area at or below
the attainment year inventory level as required by the transportation
conformity regulations. This allocation is allowed by the conformity
rule since the area would still be at or below the 1990 attainment
level for the total emissions.
USEPA Action
USEPA is approving the requested allocation of the safety margin to
the mobile source NOX emission budget for the Columbiana
County ozone maintenance area.
USEPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because
USEPA views this as a noncontroversial revision and anticipates no
adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal
Register publication, USEPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision
should adverse written comments be filed. This action will be effective
without further notice unless USEPA receives relevant adverse written
comment by December 3, 1999. Should the Agency receive such comments,
it will publish a final rule informing the public that this action will
not take effect. Any parties interested in commenting on this action
should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public
is advised that this action will be effective on January 3, 2000.
Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, entitled
``Regulatory Planning and Review.''
B. Executive Orders on Federalism
Under E.O. 12875, USEPA may not issue a regulation that is not
required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a state, local, or
tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those
governments. If the mandate is unfunded, USEPA must provide to the
Office of Management and Budget a description of the extent of USEPA's
prior consultation with representatives of affected state, local, and
tribal governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of written
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the
need to issue the regulation.
In addition, E.O. 12875 requires USEPA to develop an effective
process permitting elected officials and other representatives of
state, local, and tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely
input in the development of regulatory proposals containing significant
unfunded mandates.'' Today's rule does not create a mandate on state,
local or tribal governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable
duties on these entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a)
of E.O. 12875 do not apply to this rule.
On August 4, 1999, President Clinton issued a new executive order
on federalism, Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255 (August 10, 1999),)
which will take effect on November 2, 1999. In the interim, the current
Executive Order 12612 [52 FR 41685 (October 30, 1987),] on federalism
still applies. This rule will not have a substantial direct effect on
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 12612.
The rule affects only one State, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act.
C. Executive Order 13045
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) is
determined to be ``economically
[[Page 59647]]
significant'' as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that USEPA has reason to believe
may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory
action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental
health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain
why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective
and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it does not involve
decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or safety risks.
D. Executive Order 13084
Under E.O. 13084, USEPA may not issue a regulation that is not
required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects the
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by the tribal governments. If the mandate is unfunded,
USEPA must provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a
description of the extent of USEPA's prior consultation with
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the
regulation.
In addition, E.O. 13084 requires USEPA to develop an effective
process permitting elected and other representatives of Indian tribal
governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development
of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or uniquely affect
their communities.'' Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely
affect the communities of Indian tribal governments. Accordingly, the
requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
This final rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities because SIP approvals under section 110 and
subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create any new
requirements but simply approve requirements that the State is already
imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not create
any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under
the Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such
grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976);
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
F. Unfunded Mandates
Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, USEPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
annual costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate;
or to private sector, of $100 million or more. Under Section 205, USEPA
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires USEPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
USEPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual costs of
$100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in
the aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves
pre-existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.
G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. USEPA will submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This rule is not a ``major'' rule as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing
technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with
NTTAA, USEPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards''
(VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies
unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impractical.
USEPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to this action. Today's
action does not require the public to perform activities conducive to
the use of VCS.
I. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by January 3, 2000. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Nitrogen oxides, Transportation
conformity.
Dated: October 20, 1999.
Francis X. Lyons,
Regional Administrator.
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
[[Page 59648]]
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart KK--Ohio
2. Section 52.1885 is amended by adding paragraph (a)(13) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.1885 Control Strategy: Ozone.
(a) * * *
(13) Approval--On August 19, 1999, Ohio submitted a revision to the
ozone maintenance plan for the Columbiana County area. The revision
consists of allocating a portion of the Columbiana County area's
NOX safety margin to the transportation conformity mobile
source emissions budget. The mobile source emissions budgets for
transportation conformity purposes for the Columbiana County area are
now: 5.65 tons per day of volatile organic compound emissions for the
year 2005 and 5.55 tons per day of oxides of nitrogen emissions for the
year 2005. This approval only changes the NOX transportation
conformity emission budget for Columbiana County.
[FR Doc. 99-28386 Filed 11-2-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
