E7-5800. Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Ohio; Volatile Organic Compound Emission Control Measures for Cincinnati and Dayton

AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The EPA is approving several volatile organic compound (VOC) rules, that were submitted on May 9, 2006, into the Ohio State Implementation Plan (SIP). These rules would partially replace the VOC reductions from Ohio's vehicle inspection and maintenance (E-Check) program (which ended on December 31, 2005) in the Cincinnati and Dayton areas. These rules include a provision requiring the use of lower emitting solvents in cold cleaner degreasers, the use of more efficient auto refinishing painting application techniques and a rule requiring the use of lower emitting portable fuel containers. These rules are approvable because they contain more stringent requirements than Ohio's existing rules and they are enforceable. Ohio has correctly calculated their VOC emission reduction impact. EPA is also approving several other rule revisions, all of which meet EPA requirements, including an exemption for Ohio's printing rules, a site-specific rule for an aerosol can filling facility, elimination of the fluid catalytic cracking unit limitations for a Marathon Petroleum LLC facility, and an alternative leak detection and repair program for the Premcor Lima Refinery. These rules were proposed for approval on December 6, 2006, and no adverse comments were received.

DATES:

This final rule is effective on April 30, 2007.

ADDRESSES:

EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0545. All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information (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 through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We recommend that you telephone Steven Rosenthal, Environmental Engineer, at [phone] before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Steven Rosenthal, Environmental Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, [phone], [e-mail].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information section is arranged as follows:

I. What Public Comments Were Received on the Proposed Approval and What Is EPA's Response.

II. What Action Is EPA Taking?

III. What Is the Purpose of This Action?

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.

I. What Public Comments Were Received on the Proposed Approval and What Is EPA's Response?

No adverse comments were received. The Sherwin-Williams Company submitted a comment supporting approval of paragraph 3745-21-09 (RR) pertaining to the site specific reasonably available control technology requirements for the Sherwin-Williams aerosol can filling facility in Bedford Heights, Ohio.

Since this comment was supportive of the action being taken there is no need to respond to it.

II. What Action Is EPA Taking?

EPA is approving several VOC rules into the Ohio SIP. These include more stringent solvent degreasing rules, an exemption for its printing rules, a site-specific rule for an aerosol can filling facility, elimination of the fluid catalytic cracking unit limitations for a Marathon Petroleum Company LLC facility, an alternative leak detection and repair program for the Premcor Lima Refinery, a rule requiring the marketing and sale of only low-emitting portable fuel containers, and a rule including the use of high efficiency paint application equipment at auto body refinishing operations.

III. What Is the Purpose of This Action?

The primary purpose of the rules that Ohio submitted is to obtain VOC emission reductions. These reductions would partially offset the increase in VOC emissions resulting from elimination of its E-Check program in the Cincinnati and Dayton areas. Ohio EPA has submitted additional VOC and nitrogen oxide emission reduction measures to fully compensate for the resulting increase in emissions. These additional emission reduction measures, as well as other demonstrations needed to remove the E-Check program from the Ohio SIP, will be the subject of future rulemaking actions. This notice also approves several site-specific rule revisions that have been requested by emission sources in Ohio.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.

Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

Because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 or a “significant regulatory action,” this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

This action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it 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).

Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

Executive Order 13132: Federalism

This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the 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 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule implementing a federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act.

Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks

This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.

National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the state to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

Congressional Review Act

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. EPA 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 action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

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 May 29, 2007. 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
• Intergovernmental relations
• Incorporation by reference
• Nitrogen dioxide
• Ozone
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
• Volatile organic compounds

Dated: March 6, 2007.

Mary A. Gade,

Regional Administrator, Region 5.

For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, of 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:

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

Subpart KK—Ohio

2. Section 52.1870 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(135) to read as follows:

§ 52.1870

Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(135) On May 9, 2006, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency submitted several volatile organic compound rules for approval into the Ohio State Implementation Plan.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Ohio Administrative Code Chapter 3745-21-01 Definitions: Paragraphs (D) and (Z), adopted 1/31/2006, effective 2/10/2006.

(B) Ohio Administrative Code Chapter 3745-21-04 Attainment dates and compliance time schedules: Paragraph (C)(16)(c), adopted 1/31/2006, effective 2/10/2006.

(C) Ohio Administrative Code Chapter 3745-21-09 Control of emissions of volatile organic compounds from stationary sources and perchloroethylene from dry cleaning facilities: Paragraphs (O)(2)(e),(O)(6)(b),(T)(4),(Y), (HH), (RR), and (VV), adopted 3/2/2006, effective 3/12/2006.

(D) Ohio Administrative Code Chapter 3745-21-17: Portable Fuel Containers, adopted 1/31/2006, effective 2/10/2006.

(E) Ohio Administrative Code Chapter 3745-21-18: Commercial Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Refinishing Operations, adopted 1/31/2006, effective 2/10/2006.